tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post1137947252400370714..comments2023-11-08T22:36:17.793-05:00Comments on SirRobert's World: A free-thinker taking flight on her own...Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05255878533958017256noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5682535467434223800.post-77772931894734281042008-09-26T08:27:00.000-05:002008-09-26T08:27:00.000-05:00Well you see, it's not supposed to be taken litera...Well you see, it's not supposed to be taken literally. All the Old Testament is simply a form of parable. Adam and Eve didn't really eat of the Tree of Knowledge and cause Original Sin to mar all future generations until Jesus cam along to atone for it. Kane and Abel might represent tribes of humanity among many all descended from an earlier tribe represented by Adam. So Kane (the tribe) could take a wife and become progenitor to the rest of humanity but it would only be a symbolic marriage and mating.<BR/><BR/>That would make the idea of Original Sin a symbol as well of course. There is no actual stain on the souls of all humanity passed down in Adam's seed. That's just more symbolism.<BR/><BR/>Wait, doesn't that mean that the sacrifice on the cross was unnecessary? If original sin is symbolic then an actual sacrifice is simply barbarism.<BR/><BR/>Please keep us informed. This could get interesting. Don't let the teacher dismiss the question either. There is no such thing as a stupid question. Every question is an attempt to understand and dismissing them is to dismiss the very nature of curiosity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com