This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Evangelicals question the existence of Adam and Eve

Steven Mading's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by Steven Mading

Comment 3 by hypnoticbob :

The concept that Genesis, at the very least, Adam and Eve, is not to be taken seriously (literal) is a slippery slope isn't it? I mean, cherry-pick that out of their already cherry-picked literalism, and what has one got? How much of the rest of the 'old testament' and the New do you decide to believe in? I suppose facts can only be used to support skepticism just so far; for some more than others.

Not the least of which is original sin. The Catholic Church still claims original sin is correct doctrine even after making public pronouncements admitting that the Adam and Eve story didn't really happen and Catholics should take it as mere allegory. Since the original justification for the doctrine of original sin was Adam and Eve's alleged fall from Eden, this is really hypocritical of them to continue to uphold Original Sin. (Of course the reason they won't let it go is that it's the chief reason behind their claims about why everyone needs the church).

Then again, when people start massively changing the underlying doctrine of the religion like that I consider it dishonest that they keep on using the same label for the religion at all, There are many multiple religions today that all call themselves Christianity despite having utterly incompatible beliefs and totally different dogmas from each other. Clearly they're actually following totally different religions with a common origin, which is not the same thing as following the same religion. Giving them the same label is a lot like claiming that a sparrow and an ostrich are the same species just because they share a common ancestor.

Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:28:42 UTC | #865293