There is a heresy related to the opening chapters of Genesis that has been popular in theological liberal circles...N.T. Wright is a good example of a proponent of this nonsensical reasoning.
Here is how N.T. Wright is presented by the secular media...
"TIME Magazine called him “one of the most formidable figures in the world of Christian thought.” Newsweek once labeled him “the world’s leading New Testament scholar.” His name is N.T. Wright, and he has just written a controversial book on the Bible.
In “Surprised by Scripture: Engaging Contemporary Issues,” Wright comes out swinging on theological hot buttons such as Darwinian evolution, whether Adam was a historical figure, and why he thinks the Bible makes space for women pastors." RNS
Here is the question posed for Wright:
"RNS: You address the question of whether Adam was a historical figure in one of the first chapters of the book, and you’re also an authority on the Apostle Paul. Another Theologian I respect, Dr. Albert Mohler, has written, “If Adam was not a historical figure, and thus if there was no Fall into sin and all humanity did not thus sin in Adam, then Paul’s telling of the Gospel is wrong.” How do you respond?"
Here's Wright's Response:
"The way I see it is that
--There were many hominids or similar creatures,
--part of the long slow process of God’s good creation.
--And at a particular time God called a particular pair for a particular task: to look after his creation and make it flourish in a whole new way.....
For some insight into how warped his theological worldview has become--this quote from the interview demonstrates it:
"But it’s important that we do not reduce the Bible to a collection of true doctrines and right ethics."
RNS
Now you know how this heresy comes about in someone's brain....
Here is how N.T. Wright is presented by the secular media...
"TIME Magazine called him “one of the most formidable figures in the world of Christian thought.” Newsweek once labeled him “the world’s leading New Testament scholar.” His name is N.T. Wright, and he has just written a controversial book on the Bible.
In “Surprised by Scripture: Engaging Contemporary Issues,” Wright comes out swinging on theological hot buttons such as Darwinian evolution, whether Adam was a historical figure, and why he thinks the Bible makes space for women pastors." RNS
Here is the question posed for Wright:
"RNS: You address the question of whether Adam was a historical figure in one of the first chapters of the book, and you’re also an authority on the Apostle Paul. Another Theologian I respect, Dr. Albert Mohler, has written, “If Adam was not a historical figure, and thus if there was no Fall into sin and all humanity did not thus sin in Adam, then Paul’s telling of the Gospel is wrong.” How do you respond?"
Here's Wright's Response:
"The way I see it is that
--There were many hominids or similar creatures,
--part of the long slow process of God’s good creation.
--And at a particular time God called a particular pair for a particular task: to look after his creation and make it flourish in a whole new way.....
--The point is that if you start, not with Adam and a “moral test,”
--but with Adam and Eve and a vocation,
then a lot of things in Paul look significantly different."
RNSFor some insight into how warped his theological worldview has become--this quote from the interview demonstrates it:
"But it’s important that we do not reduce the Bible to a collection of true doctrines and right ethics."
RNS
Now you know how this heresy comes about in someone's brain....
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit,
after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world,
and not after Christ.
Colossians 2:8