What is the impact of Evolution on the doctrine of Salvation?

[Erik Nelson]

at a very basic level, the OT describes a God in complete control over a perfectly "good" cosmos, from the formation of earth through the gradual population of the planet with various lifeforms, up until the snake (nachash) tempted early humans to reject / refuse God's sovereign authority.

According to the OT, everything was perfectly "good", all according to Divine Plan, until the snake-induced rejection / refusal of God's authority in Eden. Since then everything has become "bad", as knowing "good & bad" fallen humans consistently choose "bad".

God was guiding "evolution" of everything on earth, up through earth itself, until Eden. God was in control and all was "good" (Gen 1). In Eden, man sinned by disobeying God's commands. Man started resisting God's Will.

The penalty was death, which penalty was paid on the Cross, that all who acknowledged God's commands & will should once again be saved, as once again God would be in uncontested control of everything on earth, which would then be "good" again.

No contradictions.

 

[Inkfingers]

When was Adam "perfect?" The Bible doesn't tell us.

And God said it was good.

That's a pretty high standard...

 

[Inkfingers]

at a very basic level, the OT describes a God in complete control over a perfectly "good" cosmos, from the formation of earth through the gradual population of the planet with various lifeforms, up until the snake (nachash) tempted early humans to reject / refuse God's sovereign authority.

According to the OT, everything was perfectly "good", all according to Divine Plan, until the snake-induced rejection / refusal of God's authority in Eden. Since then everything has become "bad", as knowing "good & bad" fallen humans consistently choose "bad".

God was guiding "evolution" of everything on earth, up through earth itself, until Eden. God was in control and all was "good" (Gen 1). In Eden, man sinned by disobeying God's commands. Man started resisting God's Will.

The penalty was death, which penalty was paid on the Cross, that all who acknowledged God's commands & will should once again be saved, as once again God would be in uncontested control of everything on earth, which would then be "good" again.

No contradictions.

So are you saying that we evolved to the point of goodness (in which case we need a teacher not a sacrifice nailed to a cross to appease justice over a sin)?

Or are you saying that we evolved so far and then God put something extra in us to take us into Eden (in which case, if we fall back into carnal, he could just as easily do the same again rather than having his son nailed to a tree to appease justice)?

The whole sacrifice of Christ thing really only works if we were created from scratch as perfect and then fell. Anything else means we just slipped back into the same pre-existing evolved condition that God bloodlessly brought us out of in the first place.

 

[SkyWriting]

Such is not the subject of this thread.

The subject of this thread is how Evolution is incompatible with a view of man as a created being, made perfect, falling from grace, and needing the sacrifice of a saviour to atone for their fall.

I can find nothing in scripture to support the idea of God improving a previously utterly imperfect being into the state of Adamness. If that were the route, it would be a simple matter for God to fix our fall "back" into carnality (and it would no more need a saviour nailed to a cross now than it did before).

Nope. True love allows for the option of not loving back.
God even allowed the Angels to rebel becasue He was very confident on this issue.

God could have forced His angels to love Him in return, but there is something about Love that
just can't be forced. For example forcing others to love you is rape. Or criminal abuse.

So natural man was given the opportunity to live in the image of God, and he rebelled
and walked his own path. God expected this and made other plans for our redemption
through His son.

Man was re-made in the image of God. Not made from scratch. Man was made of the earth.

24 And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, land crawlers, and wild animals according to their kinds.” And it was so.

This included the natural man. Not yet a "Living" spiritual man.

 

[Inkfingers]

Nope. True love allows for the option of not loving back.
God even allowed the Angels to rebel becasue He was very confident on this issue.

God could have forced His angels to love Him in return, but there is something about Love that
just can't be forced. For example forcing others to love you is rape. Or criminal abuse.

So natural man was given the opportunity to live in the image of God, and he rebelled
and walked his own path. God expected this and made other plans for our redemption
through His son.

Man was re-made in the image of God. Not made from scratch. Man was made of the earth.

24 And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, land crawlers, and wild animals according to their kinds.” And it was so.

This included the natural man. Not yet a "Living" spiritual man.

That does not actually answer / reference the points made in my post that you quoted.

 

[SkyWriting]

Evolution is incompatible with a view of man as a created being, made perfect,

Man was re-made into the image of God.
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

The word used here is "Re-Made" or processed.

 

[Inkfingers]

Man was re-made into the image of God.
27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

The word used here is "Re-Made" or processed.

The word translated as created, which you present as "re-made", is the same word describing God's creation of the universe...

Did he remake that as well?

 

[SkyWriting]

So in all the uses, you found "remade" once and completely ignore the description in the next chapter which describes man being made from scratch rather than getting an update?

Even though I only highlighted one instance, the other usages are a similar process applied to something that already exists.

 

[SkyWriting]

The word translated as created, which you present as "re-made", is the same word describing God's creation of the universe...

Did he remake that as well?

If that's the same word, then yes, it was a process. A drawn out, systematic, planned process.
I've not checked into that part of the Hebrew writings.

If so, the Universe was "formed:"

(1), inflicted (1), inlaid (1), instituted (2), introduced (2), keep (1), kept (1), labored (1), laborers (1), made (369), maintain (6), maintained (1), make (200), make your ready (1), Maker (13), maker (4), makes (19), making (5), obey (1), observe (33), observe them carefully (1), observe to do (2), observe carefully (2), observed (12), observes (5), offer (35), offered (4), offering (1), oppressed* (1), ordained (1), perform (31), performed (23), performers (1), performing (2), performing the made (1), performs (3), practice (9), practice* (1), practiced (4), practices (6), practicing (1), prepare (26), prepared (19), preparing (2), present (5), presented (1), produce (4), produced (5), provide (13), provided (2), provides (1), punish (1), put (1), put into effect (1), put forth (1), ready (1), reign* (1), remade* (1), responsible (1), sacrifice (2), set (3), set* (1), show (16), showed (6), showing (2), shown (9), shows (3), spend (1), surely show (1), take action (6), thoroughly deal (1), treat (3), tried (1), trim (1), trimmed (1), truly practice (1), use (1), used (4), wage (2), waged (2), work (12), worked (7), worker (2), working (3), workmen* (5), works (6), woven (1), writing (1), wrought (2), yield (5), yielded (1), yields (1).

 

[Inkfingers]

Even though I only highlighted one instance, the other usages are a similar process applied to something that already exists.

The one and ONLY instance, your reference of which ignores Gen 2 explicitly saying that man was made into Eden not GM'd out of monkeys...

Like I said, I'm a long-standing proponent of TE. I'm not hostile to it (far from it!) but when I compare that to the idea of the fall from perfection I can see that Evolution is about rising up from a beginning state of imperfection, but the Fall/Atonement doctrine is about being made perfect and falling down from that. The two are diametrically opposed.

 

[Inkfingers]

If that's the same word, then yes, it was a process. A drawn out, systematic, planned process.

That's not what I asked you.

Did God, in Genesis 1:1 make or remake the universe?

 

[SkyWriting]

That's not what I asked you.

Did God, in Genesis 1:1 make or remake the universe?

Yes. But it's a different Hebrew word than created man.

bara: to shape, create
Transliteration: bara
Short Definition: created
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
a prim. root
Definition
to shape, create

brings about (1), clear (2), create (6), created (32), creates (1),
creating (3), Creator (4), cut them down (1), make (2), produced (1).
http://biblehub.com/hebrew/1254a.htm

 

[SkyWriting]

The one and ONLY instance, your reference of which ignores Gen 2 explicitly saying that man was made into Eden not GM'd out of monkeys...

Like I said, I'm a long-standing proponent of TE. I'm not hostile to it (far from it!) but when I compare that to the idea of the fall from perfection I can see that Evolution is about rising up from a beginning state of imperfection, but the Fall/Atonement doctrine is about being made perfect and falling down from that. The two are diametrically opposed.

The other usages are a similar process applied to something that already exists.
All other uses are similar to "re-made". No uses are "made from scratch."

 

[Inkfingers]

Yes. But it's a different Hebrew word than created man.

Erm, no.

Genesis 1:1 - in the beginning, God בָּרָא the heavens and the earth

Genesis 1:27 - so God בָּרָא man in his own image

It's the same word.

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus' sacrifice is based on the idea of restoring us to a previous condition, correcting the good-which-became-bad, but if we evolved out of the apes there is (by definition) no previous condition to be restored to.

When God remade man into His image, man rebelled and the whole of Creation suffered as well.
Man needs to be restored to communion with God. The human body is not involved.

 

[Inkfingers]

The other usages are a similar process applied to something that already exists.
All other uses are similar to "re-made". No uses are "made from scratch."

Oh, so God did not make the heavens and earth from scratch?

I think this conversation, such as it is, has gone as far as it can go.
Cheerio

 

[SkyWriting]

Erm, no.

Genesis 1:1 - in the beginning, God בָּרָא the heavens and the earth

Genesis 1:27 - so God בָּרָא man in his own image

It's the same word.

So you answered your own question then.
Very good slething!

 

[SkyWriting]

Rather, there is instead a future condition to be evolved into - “image of God” is not something we were, but something we may possibly become.

God did allow man to become living, but he rebelled.

 

[SkyWriting]

If true, doesn't evolution thus make a nonsense of the idea of Jesus being a substitutionary atonement (to bring us back to a 'golden age condition of pre-fall Eden); presenting us instead with a salvation that has to be evolved into rather than returned to?

Evolution has nothing to do with the Spirit nature of Man and God.

 

[SkyWriting]

I cannot see a way around this.

Either we were created and fell or we are evolved and arose.

Evolution goes nowhere anything close to the topic of the Spiritual condition of man.