Why are not Adam and Eve given more prominent status in church doctrine?

[Dadoalex]

If you don't like the answer, don't blame me. Adam and Eve are, beyond the point of that one story, never mentioned again and hold no significance in any of the religions. It is what it is

On the contrary, they are mentioned elsewhere (usually without Eve, as, save for his beginning, Adam is dead). Adam's significance in human history (Israel's history) is quite profound, really.

They forsook God, and all the licentiousness of the unrepentant heart unfolded in the human drama as illustrated in the pages of the Old Testament. For the remedy, read Romans 5. Separated from God, mankind was dead. Christ, whom Paul called a second Adam, reconciled man and God, and so mankind came alive again.

Adam absolutely is foundational to the biblical narrative.

Paul used that language in an attempt to legitimize his new cult and claim it as the successor to Jewish faith.

They also did that with the Apostles = Gods of Olympus
Easter = Spring renewal rituals of heathens
Christmas = birth of new year

These are facts.
The fact is that Adam and Eve are Like George and Martha Wayne.
Characters used to set the story then discarded.

It is what it is.

 

[Meriweather]

Why aren't Adam and Eve...

Got it. Then it wasn't any question I asked, but the question in the thread title. Thank you, that clarifies it.

My own reaction to the Thread question was to wonder why the OP thought Adam and Eve are not given prominence--why he considers their role has been downplayed. Adam and Eve chose to play with both good and evil and Biblical history details how mankind continued to play with both down through the ages.

New Testament testimony notes that Jesus was the "second" Adam, and his choice was to focus solely on good and not to play with evil. We are taught each individual has a choice. Do we follow the path of the first Adam, playing with both good and evil as we go through life; or do we follow The Way Jesus teaches and leads us--the way of goodness.

Both are prominent, but it is obvious that the focus is on latter "Adam" that we do not have to be drawn down into evil and then having to work our way out of it. Adam and Eve followed the serpent; Jesus followed God. It seems obvious why Church gives more attention to those following God than those following a serpent.

 

[norwegen]

Paul used that language in an attempt to legitimize his new cult and claim it as the successor to Jewish faith.

They also did that with the Apostles = Gods of Olympus
Easter = Spring renewal rituals of heathens
Christmas = birth of new year

What are you saying? Anything?

These are facts.
The fact is that Adam and Eve are Like George and Martha Wayne.
Characters used to set the story then discarded.

Once again, not so. Adam is mentioned throughout the scriptures.

 

[Dadoalex]

Paul used that language in an attempt to legitimize his new cult and claim it as the successor to Jewish faith.

They also did that with the Apostles = Gods of Olympus
Easter = Spring renewal rituals of heathens
Christmas = birth of new year

What are you saying? Anything?

These are facts.
The fact is that Adam and Eve are Like George and Martha Wayne.
Characters used to set the story then discarded.

Once again, not so. Adam is mentioned throughout the scriptures.

Like George and Martha Wayne.
When needed to set up a story. Then tossed on the pile.

So, let's put this one to bed.
Where is Adam and Even in the bible beyond the creation story ?
AND
What is their role beyond historical reference?

Bible experts should be able to shoot my balls off on this softball.

 

[norwegen]

Paul used that language in an attempt to legitimize his new cult and claim it as the successor to Jewish faith.

They also did that with the Apostles = Gods of Olympus
Easter = Spring renewal rituals of heathens
Christmas = birth of new year

What are you saying? Anything?

These are facts.
The fact is that Adam and Eve are Like George and Martha Wayne.
Characters used to set the story then discarded.

Once again, not so. Adam is mentioned throughout the scriptures.

Like George and Martha Wayne.
When needed to set up a story. Then tossed on the pile.

So, let's put this one to bed.
Where is Adam and Even in the bible beyond the creation story ?
AND
What is their role beyond historical reference?

Bible experts should be able to shoot my balls off on this softball.

Once again, for the third time, incorrect. Adam's narrative doesn't suddenly disappear after the creation story.

Do you see anything in Romans 5 about the creation event? Do you think hiding one's transgressions like Adam did is a reference to creation (Job 31:33)? Do you think the fall from grace is about the creation (1Cor 15:22; 1 Tim 2:14)?

So let's put this to bed and think about why God "appears" so different between the Old Testament and the New. If you can.

 

[Dadoalex]

Paul used that language in an attempt to legitimize his new cult and claim it as the successor to Jewish faith.

They also did that with the Apostles = Gods of Olympus
Easter = Spring renewal rituals of heathens
Christmas = birth of new year

What are you saying? Anything?

These are facts.
The fact is that Adam and Eve are Like George and Martha Wayne.
Characters used to set the story then discarded.

Once again, not so. Adam is mentioned throughout the scriptures.

Like George and Martha Wayne.
When needed to set up a story. Then tossed on the pile.

So, let's put this one to bed.
Where is Adam and Even in the bible beyond the creation story ?
AND
What is their role beyond historical reference?

Bible experts should be able to shoot my balls off on this softball.

Once again, for the third time, incorrect. Adam's narrative doesn't suddenly disappear after the creation story.

Do you see anything in Romans 5 about the creation event? Do you think hiding one's transgressions like Adam did is a reference to creation (Job 31:33)? Do you think the fall from grace is about the creation (1Cor 15:22; 1 Tim 2:14)?

So let's put this to bed and think about why God "appears" so different between the Old Testament and the New. If you can.

Asked and answered.
The thing you call the "New Testament" is of no value.
As described earlier it is the attempts by that new Jewish cult to legitimize their cult and spread their beliefs so their leaders could gain power.

Still, a single reference in the Bible and 2 in the "New Testament" is not mentioned throughout the scriptures."

It is, as I said, like John and Martha Wayne, characters used to set the story then reference later only for establishment. not meaning.

Hey! Don't blame me. Blame Moses, Daniel, David and the rest of the "writers."

 

[edthecynic]

So Eve was genetically MALE!

Male and female He created them. The rib account is to affirm the two are from the same substance, equal to each other.

BULLSHIT, nowhere in the bible are women equal to men.
You idiots who never actually read the bible you "believe" in, just make shit up.
And obviously according to YOU God created mankind as transgenders. Both of THEM were created Male and Female.
Genesis 3:16 (ESV)
16 To the woman he said,
“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be contrary to your husband,
but he shall rule over you.”

 

[edthecynic]

I mean others from biblical times are portrayed with statues etc. We give a lot of homage to God, Jesus and various prophets but other than the mention in Genesis, we speak little of Adam and Eve. After all, are they not literally the Father and Mother of all mankind??

Perhaps because they never really existed.

Of course the first man and the first broad existed. The alternative, that Almighty God created 2 dudes doesn't explain how the world was populated. The idea of sex-change operations has never allowed 2 fellows to procreate.

God did not need a sex change operation to change Eve to a woman, he spoke it into existence as a curse!@
Genesis 3:16 (ESV)
16 To the woman he said,
“I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing;
in pain you shall bring forth children.
Your desire shall be contrary to your husband,
but he shall rule over you.”

 

[edthecynic]

A minority of Fundamentalist sects take the Bible literally. The majority of Christian denominations and people of faith do not.

Which allows them to make it "say" anything they want it to.

 

[edthecynic]

You know what the difference is between Adam and Nod? The breath of life. Adam was in covenant with God. Nod was not. Adam is humankind.

Nod is a city of people NOT created by God. At a time when only the created Adam and Eve and born Cain were alive, Abel being killed by Cain, Nod was a a city full of people unrelated in any to Adam and Eve.

 

[norwegen]

Adam and Eve are, beyond the point of that one story, never mentioned again and hold no significance in any of the religions.

Yea, bury yourself in that hole all you want.

 

[norwegen]

You know what the difference is between Adam and Nod? The breath of life. Adam was in covenant with God. Nod was not. Adam is humankind.

Nod is a city of people NOT created by God. At a time when only the created Adam and Eve and born Cain were alive, Abel being killed by Cain, Nod was a a city full of people unrelated in any to Adam and Eve.

Yea, okay, that's basically what I said. Creation is not literally the planet earth. Not according to the Bible. The ancients didn't even know about planets.

 

[Hollie]

I mean others from biblical times are portrayed with statues etc. We give a lot of homage to God, Jesus and various prophets but other than the mention in Genesis, we speak little of Adam and Eve. After all, are they not literally the Father and Mother of all mankind??

Perhaps because they never really existed.

Of course they did.

Nonsense.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I mean others from biblical times are portrayed with statues etc. We give a lot of homage to God, Jesus and various prophets but other than the mention in Genesis, we speak little of Adam and Eve. After all, are they not literally the Father and Mother of all mankind??

Adam and Eve story is a parable.
And, it is a story. Cain was expelled from the Garden, and went to live with "other people".
Wait... what?... other people?? You won't find a single easy answer from even the best scholars out there to explain how there were clearly more people than just Adam and Eve.

 

[Flash]

The Book of Genesis is neither a Science or History book. It is about Man's relationship to God.

 

[Meriweather]

nowhere in the bible are women equal to men.
You idiots who never actually read the bible you "believe" in, just make shit up.

I recommend reading the Hebrew, and then through the history and culture of that time. Unless needing a reason to reject the Bible is vital. In that case forget studying the Bible in the original language and culture and carry on in English.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The Book of Genesis is neither a Science or History book. It is about Man's relationship to God.

And stories just like it exist in religions much older than Christianity.

 

[norwegen]

I mean others from biblical times are portrayed with statues etc. We give a lot of homage to God, Jesus and various prophets but other than the mention in Genesis, we speak little of Adam and Eve. After all, are they not literally the Father and Mother of all mankind??

Adam and Eve story is a parable.
And, it is a story. Cain was expelled from the Garden, and went to live with "other people".
Wait... what?... other people?? You won't find a single easy answer from even the best scholars out there to explain how there were clearly more people than just Adam and Eve.

Cain lived among people who were in covenant with God. He felt a sense of belonging and security among the Adamic people; to live among others was to live in fear (Gen 4:14).

But of course, not just Cain, but the whole clan would violate covenant and so wander the wilderness. For hundreds of years. Even as these "called out" people attempted to abandon their idolatry and return to monotheism with tabernacle, they still essentially wandered. None is righteous, lamented David. No, not one. Not even David.

Once called Adam, then eventually Israel, these people never really reconciled with God until Christ came.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

nowhere in the bible are women equal to men.
You idiots who never actually read the bible you "believe" in, just make shit up.

I recommend reading the Hebrew, and then through the history and culture of that time. Unless needing a reason to reject the Bible is vital. In that case forget studying the Bible in the original language and culture and carry on in English.

Yeah except there is no "Bible". Not as a definitive book.
The Bible is a collection of written texts. And the text that is in it, is sort of like taking a small hand full of marbles out of a gallon bucket.
Why just these texts? Why not others? Who is to say what text is accurate, and what is not?
Everyone knows the Bible we have today is deeply edited set of books. The basis of all English Bible is the King James Version. Marketed as a King who fiercely instructed scholars to write exactly what they read in original text. That.... is a joke.
King James "democratized" the Bible. He removed a great deal of text that were causing a lot of arguments and divisions, and added his own beliefs into it.
Yet... the majority of people who carry one around, still pretend it is the "real thing".

 

[norwegen]

nowhere in the bible are women equal to men.
You idiots who never actually read the bible you "believe" in, just make shit up.

I recommend reading the Hebrew, and then through the history and culture of that time. Unless needing a reason to reject the Bible is vital. In that case forget studying the Bible in the original language and culture and carry on in English.

Yeah except there is no "Bible". Not as a definitive book.
The Bible is a collection of written texts. And the text that is in it, is sort of like taking a small hand full of marbles out of a gallon bucket.
Why just these texts? Why not others? Who is to say what text is accurate, and what is not?
Everyone knows the Bible we have today is deeply edited set of books. The basis of all English Bible is the King James Version. Marketed as a King who fiercely instructed scholars to write exactly what they read in original text. That.... is a joke.
King James "democratized" the Bible. He removed a great deal of text that were causing a lot of arguments and divisions, and added his own beliefs into it.
Yet... the majority of people who carry one around, still pretend it is the "real thing".

The text of the KJV derived from all the preceding English translations, i.e., the Bishops Bible, the Great Bible, and the Geneva Bible. The KJV also relied heavily on the Masoretic text, the Hebrew of which the translation committees of the seventeenth century did not fully comprehend, and also the Textus Receptus, a text far removed from the original Greek. In short, the KJV was a translation that was destined for revision.

The KJV is not really the basis for English-language texts any more. Scholarship and manuscript discoveries are what remove variances in the text.

The KJV isn't what is making Bible translations more accurate; education is.