Johnny Skeptic

Romans 5:12 says "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Was Paul referring to Adam? If so, why did he believe the story? In fact, why did Paul believe anything that the Old Testament said about supernatural events?

Why did the disciples originally choose to follow Jesus? Did they have any prior evidence of his supernatural powers?

GakuseiDon

(deleted)

pharoah

Why wouldn't he believe the story? He was a devout Pharisee before becoming a Xtian, and they certainly believed in the literal truth of the Torah.

This question is completely unrelated to your topic. You should start a new thread with it.

Johnny Skeptic

Prior to choosing to follow him. Do you believe that Paul took the story of Adam and Eve literally? Do you take the story of Adam and Eve literally? How about the stories of the great flood, the plagues in Egypt and the parting of the Red Sea?

John A. Broussard

"Did Paul take the story of Adam and Eve literally?"

A strange question indeed. Paul lived in an age when gods regularly visited human beings, when there was no knowledge of evolution, of the true age of the earth, of the incredible expanse of the universe, of the germ theory of infectious disease, etc.

Will all that we know today, we still have many people (some who post on this thread) who literally believe the Adam and Eve story. Given that, it would be strange indeed if Paul didn't also hold to that literal belief. He was a child of his age, after all.

Johnny Skeptic

I doubt that you will think that my question is strange once I have told you why I asked it. I asked it as a preliminary to asking 1) why 1st century Christians believed that the supernatural claims in the Old Testament were true, and 2) in the 1st century B.C., what apologetic evidence was there that defended Old Testament claims of the supernatural.

In short, did Paul trust the Old Testament based upon sufficient evidence?

John A. Broussard

Yup! Hook, line and sinker.

But, as with any true believer, his interpretation of the OT (along with its implications for Paulinians) was the only correct one.

All others wrong!!!!

motorhead

Not on the standards of evidence most of us would demand today for such claims. Someone already mentioned consider the world Paul lived in at the time and what knowledge they had. The Bible itself does not defend the claims. And Jesus didn't go around spouting the Intelligent Design argument, the argument for the existence of God from morality, etc. The existence of God (Israel's God) was assumed by him. Even those who heard him preached probably would've never thought to ask him to prove the existence of God. The only debates seemed to be around the will of God. Probably mostly everyone believed in God but they disagreed on the will of God, as happens today with believers.

motorhead

Yes, Paul appears to have believed the Adam and Eve story literally happened. Otherwise, his theology falls apart.

Why did Jesus have followers? Well, I think the primary reason is because he performed what were considered to be miracles by his contemporaries. This coupled with his message of the imminent end convinced some that he was the prophet sent by God to usher in the last days. He probably was very charismatic too, in general.

Zeichman

Never-you-mind the writings of Philo or Josephus, who was also a "devout Pharisee".

And just because there are anti-intellectuals today doesn't mean that everyone was an anti-intellectual 2000 years ago.