Re: Kerkut

George Murphy wrote:

>Dick Fischer wrote:
>
> > I Corinthians 15:22 says: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall
> > all be made alive." I believe this verse mandates that if we believe in a
> > historical Christ that we should also believe in a historical Adam. I
> > consider it inconsistent in light of this verse to believe that Christ
> > lived and breathed, but that Adam was merely a symbolic representation of
> > mankind. Would you agree?
> >
> > As to the manner of death, is this physical death or spiritual death?
>
> I know where it says "As in Adam _all_ die." It doesn't say
> anywhere "As in
>Adan _some_ die." Adam is the theological representative & beginning of
>all humanity
>which is enmeshed in death - which is to say, the whole human race
>today. Adam is not
>"merely a symbolic representation of" humanity, he IS humanity qua sinful
>& dying
>creature - including the first humans who chose to sin.

Let's look at the second part of that verse. Are ALL human beings made
alive in Christ. No! Only those who hear and believe. So the word "all"
is qualified in this verse. It infers all of a category of men. Adam, as
the first person made responsible to God and with life to offer,
failed. All those who could have been saved under the Adamic covenant,
however they were to be saved under God's plan, died.

We can speculate on who those men were. Neanderthals, for example, lived
too soon. So they died anyway - Adam wasn't responsible, Christ didn't do
any of them any good. So "all" would not include any manner of hominid who
walked the earth prior to Adam's introduction whenever he lived. My best
estimate of Adam's time on earth was about 7,000 years ago in
Mesopotamia. If you have a better time frame, George, let's hear it.

I can see nothing in this verse that implies that Adam was the flesh and
blood, biological father of all mammalian bipeds. Is that what you
believe, George? I don't think so, because I don't remember you weighing
in on Adam as a person, merely a "theological representative." Okay, so
"As in Adam (the "theological representative" who never actually lived) all
die ..." A theological truth from a historical fabrication. Now you know
why YEC thrives. This doesn't make sense to them or me.

You can't have it both ways, George. Adam either lived, or he did not, he
either was, or he was not. "All" men do not die due to an uncommitted act
by a non-existent person as your theological rendering mandates.

>You chose to make him a single historical individual at the cost of
>destroying his theological role as the one in whom "all" die.

Or you have destroyed the person to give him status as the ultimate father
of all mankind. This is simply theological double speak. Living near
Washington, DC, I'm used to political double speak coming from Capital
Hill. This is the same thing.

You appear to advocate that all men, who really did live, died from the
misstep of one who didn't. So which of these luminaries do you think would
have bled red blood had they cut a finger? Adam? Noah? Abraham? All of
them? None of them? Where do the nonexistent patriarchs phase out and the
flesh and blood patriarchs phase in?

>Concerning your last question, it is not _just_ physical death. But we
>have a
>unitary understanding of the human (as I tend more & more to do) I think
>we need to give
>careful thought to just what should be meant by "spiritual death."

No argument from me!

Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Sun Feb 8 12:12:28 2004