N.T. Wright and Pete Enns: Paul's Perspective on Adam

[AegeanKing]

N.T. Wright is amazing!

[slick222]

Trusting the total claims of science over the total claims of Christianity, Enns wants Wright to weasel out of Adam's historicity. Wright didn't bite. In the end, you have to risk science or religion. One of the other has to budge. Jesus' resurrection violates science even more provably than creation. When will Enns apply his alleged "third way" to that question with honesty? This is the well-worn path out of orthodoxy that travelers don't seem to realize until its way too late.

[dragondoubt]

I don't quite get the faithful Israel angle you are presenting. As I read the Bible I get the understanding that Adam was created perfect and had free will. He sinned, an action of that will. All mankind has been afflicted with that sin, which may have been different if Adam and Eve had children before the sin. The affliction of sin on mankind means that we are not perfect and so mankind needed that perfect life of Jesus to redeem us to God. Maybe I heard you wrong.

[kingdeef]

And what about Adam's historicity? Dear people of BioLogos, I appreciate these talks but they're all so very short. It won't hurt to deal with the topic more thoroughly in longer talks, I think.

[discjockeyfuture]

@kingdeef I actually agree with you. I enjoy reading their articles and blogs, but a longer video or interview would be very much appreciated.