> >I'm sorry that for you Adam and Eve are no more than spiritual
metaphors.
> >That difference between us no doubt accounts for the difference in our
> >conclusions. Concerning the definition of the image of God: it is that
> >which Christ redeems. "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be
> >conformed to the likeness of his Son...." (Rom. 8:29) "Likeness" here
can
> >be translated as "image." In Romans 5: 12-19, especially verses 12 and
19,
> >Paul teaches that it was Adam who sinned and Christ who takes away that
> >sin. I wish you could see that the Bible teaches that the image and the
sin
> >started with Adam and that Christ redeems that fallen image. That's why
I
> >think that behaviors, such as tool-making, need not be restricted to
image
> >bearers.
>
> I think that Adam and Eve were real individuals; however, I'm not certain
> that physical descent from them is necessary since physical descent from
> Jesus is not necessary for redemption. It seems to me that they could
also
> be representatives out of a larger group.
But David, Genesis 3:20 says, "Adam named his wife Eve, because she would
become the mother of all the living." An NIV note says that "Eve" probably
means living.
I really don't see any inconsistency in these two ideas: Adam and Eve are
the parents of all people; Jesus saves us from the sins began by Adam and
Eve. The Bible teaches physical descent in the one case, but an entirely
different relation in the other.
Anyway, it's good to hear from you!
Russ
Russell Maatman
e-mail: rmaat@mtcnet.net
Home: 401 5th Avenue
Sioux Center, IA 51250