[Veelox]

A few thoughts. One is that not all of christendom subscribes to the view that it was literally one man, some take a less literal view. Second, a vast majority of human suffering is down stream of human decisions. Yes it is possible for an omnipotent being to stop all suffering but I would argue it would remove all moral decision making from humans which is important.

[esperent]

> not all of christendom subscribes to the view that it was literally one man, some take a less literal view

I grew up in a Christian country and your "some" is doing a lot of work. Sure, perhaps some specific Christian theologists take that view. But, all actual Christians are taught from childhood that it was one specific man, tempted by one specific woman into eating a literal fruit. The only thing that's generally mentioned as open to interpretation is whether the fruit was an apple. You might get exposed to more nuanced theological views if you study at a seminary, but not while living your life as an average person who identifies as Christian, which is the vast majority.

[ipaddr]

The majority of Christians (Catholics) are told to not read the bible literally. Taking the bible literally is where logic and critical thinking breakdown.

[elros]

I thought the apple thing was understood to be a Latin pun between “malum” (evil) and “mālum” (apple). Isn’t it so?

[taneq]

Ah yes, hence "maleficarum" being an alternate name for AppleTalk. :D

(Source: I made this up.)

[kelnos]

> One is that not all of christendom subscribes to the view that it was literally one man, some take a less literal view.

I was raised Catholic (mass every weekend, CCD through 8th grade) and not once were we ever taught your interpretation. It was Adam and Eve, one man, one woman.

[mathgeek]

It’s not a part of Catholic doctrine. You won’t find the core beliefs of much, much more mainstream sects in Catholic teachings, let alone the more uncommon beliefs that are out there.

[thowawatp302]

> One is that not all of christendom subscribes to the view that it was literally one man, some take a less literal view.

That is such a tiny minority I’ve never even heard of that until now

[genghisjahn]

It’s a lot larger than you think.

[thih9]

> Second, a vast majority of human suffering is down stream of human decisions.

This implies there is a small minority, i.e. human suffering not down stream of human decisions - what about that?

I actually don’t want to argue, I can understand that for some people disregarding that part or finding an explanation is enough and still helpful.

My point is to highlight that, similarly, for others, this idea and its interpretations are unhelpful.