|
I too think the Adam and Eve story was allegorical in nature, and intended to help explain man's relationship with God to the Isrealites long ago. In addition to the quandry raised by evidence of dinosaurs, How did God's children populate the earth without alot of incest in the beginning? There are two many logical flaws with literal creationism. However, this is not necessarily inconsistent with God's message, or a belief in it. I think God had a hand in creating nature, and one that evolves. I posted a quote in a comment on the philosophy board about how animals' bodies, when they are about to die, release all their stored endorphins. They cannot use them in the future, for they are about to die, and why not make dying a little less painful? Evolution cannot explain this on it's own. What difference would it make in passing on ones genes whether dying were less painful or not?
The eating of the fruit of knowledge represents mankind's questioning of the world around him and the relationship with God that was no longer simply blind acceptance of what was provided, as animals do. (Remember, all dogs go to heaven?)
Instead, now that man was a sentient being, capable of questioning, steps had to be taken to draw closer to God, whether through sacrifice and adherence to God's laws or acceptance of His son's sacrifice for mankind.
I too think that this thread probably belongs on the Philosophy Board, but that is my personal philosophy/theology on the matter.
|