Terry Gray wrote:
> As Christ's representation stretched back before His saving work, why
> couldn't Adam's representation stretch back before his fall?
Why should it? God redeems who He chooses to redeem. And God's timing is
His timing. I may wish to see representatives of Homo erectus in heaven,
but if God has decided He doesn't want them there, then that is utterly His
decision. I certainly am in no position to question His decisions on
redempton. Just like each of you, I try to figure it out from what I have
learned from the Bible.
There are realities from the realms of science and history that need to be
factored into our theological domain. Bible interpretation in a vacuum of
extra-biblical information has led us into a total misunderstanding of
Genesis 2-11. But there are clues throughout Scripture that you can see
once you are on the right track.
Adam has a historical niche. So does the flood. So does the incident at
Babel. So does Abraham. All can be placed in Mesopotamia from about 4800
BC to about 2000 BC. This precludes Genesis history from being human
history. Live with it.
On the assumption Moses was the writer or editor of Genesis, who was his
audience? Was it not the children of Israel? This was their history.
These were their patriarchs. We are free to look over the shoulders of the
Jews and read their history, but it doesn't make it our history. My
ancestors were chasing reindeer herds when the Accadians and Sumerians were
growing grain and raising livestock. As much as I might covet Adamic
ancestry (though I can't see why) the realities of geography don't permit
it.
> Kidner doesn't propose a "back in time" idea but does allow for
> representation without physical relatedness. Here's the key sentence:
> *...the unity of mankind 'in Adam' and our common status as sinners
> through his offence
> are expressed in Scripture in terms not of heredity but simply of
> solidarity. We nowhere find applied to us any argument from physical
> descent .... Rather, Adam's sin is shown to have implicated all men
> because he was the federal head of humanity, somewhat as in Christ's death
> 'one died for all, therefore all died' (2 Cor. 5:14). Paternity plays no
> part in making Adam 'the figure of him that was to come' (Rom. 5:14).*
For one who doesn't defend me, Terry, this is certainly a defense.
Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Sat Nov 13 20:39:15 2004
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Nov 13 2004 - 20:39:15 EST