Peter Enns on Adam, Eve, and the Culture War

[bubsie44]

@drewas55 Nobody is saying that Genesis cannot be believed. They're saying that we interpret it in an inappropriate manner. Genesis is not false, it is just not as literal as some may believe. Even if Genesis was false, we could still determine the historicity of Jesus' life based on historical methods. The two don't have anything to do with one another. They were written thousands of years apart and are two different genres of writing, written to serve different purposes.

[drewas55]

If Genesis cannot be believed, then how do we know "what Jesus did?" You can't reject foundational doctrine and then claim adherence to subsequent revelation.

[gerontodon]

I'm not a Christian so maybe I don't have as much insight into this issue as some. However, I'm not a rational materialist, and I do think that the theory that random mutation, together with selection by the environment is responsible for biological form is inherently materialist (philosphically). I also think that it isn't obviously true. Samuel Butler, in the 19th c, pointed out that others had proposed 'evolution' and ideas about what drives it, so Darwinism and 'evolution' are not synonyms.