Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[BNR32FAN]

I never said I don't believe Adam was created on the 6th day. And yes I agree it could of took 24 hours or 1.314 × 1013 hours

What does this mean?

1.314 × 1013 hours

How many hours are in one day?

 

[BeyondET]

Not according to this statement

Show me in the bible it was instantly

 

[BeyondET]

What does this mean?

1.314 × 1013 hours

How many hours are in one day?

In the beginning of creation or on earth today?

 

[Job 33:6]

Right. You become a sinner when you give in to temptation. Being tempted is not a sin. Jesus was tempted, but did not sin. Giving into temptation is sin. So technically the first person who sinned was Eve, but Eve was under Adam's authority as his wife, and therefore Adam was responsible. Adam also ate with her, so Adam was responsible personally as well as responsible as a leader.


I think you are confusing terms a little bit. Let's define these words. Oxford languages:
evil - profoundly immoral and wicked
temptation - the desire to do something wrong or unwise
sin - an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law
soul - the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal

So Satan was evil. Evil existed in the spiritual realm but Adam and Eve did not know it. They knew about it because of the tree, but they did not know it intimately. They knew good intimately, because they knew God intimately, but they did not know evil.

Agree?

Then God gives a commandment - do not eat the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. As in do not learn how to be evil.

Eve is tempted - being tempted is not a sin. Eve gives into temptation, eats the fruit, and simultaneously sins and learns how to sin or learns what evil is and how to be evil. Adam does the same.

Agree?

So yes, technically Eve sinned first, but she was Adam's flesh and bone and she was under Adam's authority as his wife, so what she did Adam did. Adam is being held responsible for bringing sin into the world not only because he ate, but also because of his status as being Eve's husband. Just like the pastor of a church would be held responsible if the church decided to burn a witch, for example.

Ok, so Adam and Eve sin/learn how to be evil, and experience spiritual death - a separation from God. And that is the fate of every human being that has ever lived, we are spiritually dead and separated from God. We get to the judgement day, and God's like well, you're separated from Me, so no heaven for you. Except that God didn't want that. So He made a plan. Spiritual sin could be passed onto a physical body of a lamb, and the lamb could die a physical death, but the person would no longer have that particular sin, so the person would be made spiritually alive. Except that that only worked for one sin at a time. So He sent His own Son, who took a physical body of a human and died both a physical and a spiritual death in exchange for all of our sins at once, and that's how we can be raised both physically and spiritually to an eternal physical and spiritual life.

Agree?

And God also said that for those people who lived between Adam and Jesus there was an slightly modified path - all they had to do was believe in God, and it would be credited to them as righteousness because their sins would get paid for by Jesus anyway.

So far so good?

Ok. Now let's introduce Adam's grandma. Let's call her Lucy. Lucy is a person, with a soul because, like you say, a person is a person is a person. She lives without knowing God because, as you say, God had not had a relationship with humans. She also does not know how to be evil and she does not sin. She does not sin because there is no law. She does not know how to be evil, because Adam would have known it and he didn't. She dies. Adam and Eve sin. Dead Lucy who never disobeyed God and did not know how to be evil is now considered sinful because "all have sinned". By now she is dead, so she can't decide to believe in God. At judgement day, where does she go?

PS. This, by the way, has nothing to do with whether evolution is real. This has to do with whether God chose to create humans by evolution, or if God chose to just create them and give them a body of a mammal, but we don't know how exactly. What we are trying to do is see if we can use theology and logic to discover whether Lucy could have been Adam's ancestor.

Here's the gospel coalition:

The Origin of Sin

The question of the origin of Sin asks what was the cause of Adam’s sin, by which the human race fell from righteousness to condemnation.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

They talk about Satan's sin prior to the fall.

Even answers in Genesis recognizes sin before the fall as well.

Very conservative organizations, and Bible scholars alike in academia, it's very common that you'll find the understanding that there was sin before the fall.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Show me in the bible it was instantly

On the sixth day. I never said it was instantly.

 

[Mercy Shown]

Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

Sure, but you don't have to. You can assume evolution without believing in it. Let's talk about the utility of the theory of Evolution.

I am a Christian and worked evolution. I used the evolution model to implement AI programs. They are called evolutionary algorithms. You don't have to believe in evolution to work with it. If you search US patents in the last ten years, you will find many applications of evolution models. The theory of evolution has practical values. The US economy benefits from it. You cannot deny its utility.

Unlike other branches of hard sciences, there is not as much mathematical justification for Evolution. Nevertheless, it is a useful paradigm.

The Cheating Cell: How Evolution Helps Us Understand and Treat Cancer

If the theory works in daily practical life, there is no need to reject it. There is no need to believe in it either in the sense of spiritual faith.

See also

• Adam, Eve, and evolution
• How old is the earth?.

But are you speaking of adaptation or Darwinian evolution? Adaptation is falsifiable and demonstrable. Both can be observed. Darwinian evolution presents so many improbabilities that it is a black box theory. Now, in fairness, if we put creation under the same microscope as evolution, it also has improbabilities. From a purely human viewpoint, origins are obscure and not very well understood.

But I would expect that adaptation is probably a better model for AI than Darwinian evolution.

 

[BeyondET]

On the sixth day. I never said it was instantly.

And I never said Adam wasn't of the 6th day

 

[BNR32FAN]

In the beginning of creation or on earth today?

Is there a difference?

 

[tonychanyt]

But are you speaking of adaptation or Darwinian evolution?

I use the term evolution biologically and technically. It describes the process by which populations of organisms change over time through successive generations. It is driven by mechanisms such as natural selection, genetic drift, mutation, and gene flow.

 

[Mercy Shown]

I use the term evolution biologically and technically. It describes the process by which populations of organisms change over time through successive generations. It is driven by mechanisms such as natural selection, genetic drift, mutation, and gene flow.

Yes, all of these things also describe adaptation. But changing from a single-celled creature into a fully functional human is quite a different story. That would be akin to AI turning itself into a sentient entity without programmers' interference.

 

[tonychanyt]

Yes, all of these things also describe adaptation. But changing from a single-celled creature into a fully functional human is quite a different story. That would be akin to AI turning itself into a sentient entity without programmers' interference.

Good point. See Adam, Eve, and Evolution and follow up there.

 

[Dan1988]

There’s nothing wrong with speculation if it doesn’t contradict what is written but we shouldn’t even hold our speculations to be true but merely hold them as a viable possibility.

I'm not at liberty to speculate about something that actually contradicts what God has said. God said He created everything that exists in 6 days, so I have to take Him at His word and utterly reject all other theories. There is no wiggle room to allow any other viable possibilities to come into the picture

 

[BNR32FAN]

I'm not at liberty to speculate about something that actually contradicts what God has said. God said He created everything that exists in 6 days, so I have to take Him at His word and utterly reject all other theories. There is no wiggle room to allow any other viable possibilities to come into the picture

Yes I absolutely agree 100%, what I was referring to are things that are unclear according to the scriptures. There are a few things I hold as possibilities like annihilationism or eternal torment. The scriptures give evidence supporting both of these concepts and honestly I can’t determine which is correct. My compassion causes me to lean towards annihilationism yet I don’t treat the idea as truth because I can’t be sure if that’s what actually takes place or not. I’m a firm believer in saying “I don’t know”, sometimes that’s the best answer because it’s a lot better than giving a wrong answer. But on the subject of creation the scriptures are crystal clear. The only thing that causes them to be unclear is outside influence that is not coming from scripture.

 

[IceJad]

I'm not at liberty to speculate about something that actually contradicts what God has said. God said He created everything that exists in 6 days, so I have to take Him at His word and utterly reject all other theories. There is no wiggle room to allow any other viable possibilities to come into the picture

Thing about Genesis is that the whole book is full of both literal and non-literal passages. On top of that a lot of the cultural context behind the text has been lost to history.

 

[olgamc]

People can always be saved by Christ, even after death.

Ok. You entirely missed the difference between sin and evil. But ok. Let's say you are right and God created a world with evil in it and called it good because for whatever reason He did not care that the world was evil, He just cared that it worked. I very very deeply disagree with this, but fine.

So following your logic, Lucy gets saved because she is a person. Let's keep going up the family tree. Lucy's grandma also gets saved because she is also a person? Lucy's grandma's grandma, who is an ape gets saved because she is a person? An ameba gets saved because it is a person? Surely there has to be a change from an animal to a person at some point in history?

 

[Dan1988]

Yes I absolutely agree 100%, what I was referring to are things that are unclear according to the scriptures. There are a few things I hold as possibilities like annihilationism or eternal torment. The scriptures give evidence supporting both of these concepts and honestly I can’t determine which is correct. My compassion causes me to lean towards annihilationism yet I don’t treat the idea as truth because I can’t be sure if that’s what actually takes place or not. I’m a firm believer in saying “I don’t know”, sometimes that’s the best answer because it’s a lot better than giving a wrong answer. But on the subject of creation the scriptures are crystal clear. The only thing that causes them to be unclear is outside influence that is not coming from scripture.

I know there are bible verses which seem to contradict others, but most theologians agree that there are no contradictions in the bible and the problem is misinterpretation. Every single verse in the bible must be in harmony and line up with the rest of the bible.

There are challenges with translating three different languages and then interpreting the texts while keeping them in their intended context. Sometimes the same word has three different applications, depending on it's intended context. Just to mention one example, the word "world" has four different meanings depending on the context of the given verse.

There are many other words such as "death" or "die". God told Adam and Eve they would surely die if they ate from the tree. Some readers would say, they failed to die so there's something wrong with the bible. Others would say, they did die spiritually. Paul said he is dead to the world but he was still alive.

My understanding of the second death mentioned in the book of revelation, is; the first time we died was when we inherited the sin nature from our parent and ancestors Adam and Eve. Those who die the second time are perinatally separated from God on judgement day. We weren't annihilated at our first death and those who were not born again won't be annihilated at the second permanent death.

The bible doctrine of hell, describes the state of those who died in their sin as being separated from God. So they have no love or comfort of any kind. And there are many different levels of punishment, depending on he works of the person. The lake of fire is a red hot stream of lava, God created it for the Devil and His Demons but some people will also be cast into it because they committed extremely evil deeds.

The reason hell is eternal, is because nobody in that place ever repents. They continually scream in agony and curse God and Blaspheme His name, they never come to place of repentance because they are in constant torment.

 

[olgamc]

Also, I would say that that's probably why Paul is talking about two different kinds of sin in verse 14.

‭‭Romans 5:14 NET‬‬
[14] Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type of the coming one) transgressed.

Here Paul refers to sin, but he says that it is not in the same way that Adam transgressed. He's saying that there were people who sinned, not in the same way that Adam sinned. Because some people sin under the law, and some people don't.

And then if we back up one verse again, we see that sin under the law is held accountable, and send not under the law is not held accountable.


And so Adam's grandma would fit the latter category. She would not have been a perfect being like Jesus, she would have sinned, but with no law, she would not have been held accountable. And she would have lived and died this way, unless she lived after the fall. But in this hypothetical I guess we're just thinking about people prior to Adam, who lived and died prior to the fall.

Paul is talking from Adam until Moses. Not before Adam. So from Adam to Moses there was sin (because of Adam) but no law (because no Moses). And sinning not in the same way that Adam - well, how did Adam sin? He ate the fruit. Nobody else was able to sin in the same way because we don't have access to the fruit. We sin in other ways - we lie, we murder, we have a sin of pride.

Then flip back to Romans 2:12-15 - "All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) "

Then flip back even more to Romans 1:18-21 - "The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened."

So according to Romans 1, if people existed before Adam, these people had the capacity to know God and indeed they knew God. Which you say they didn't. According to Romans 1, they where godless and wicked and God's wrath is on them, but according to you they were not held accountable. According to Romans 2, Lucy would have been judged by her conscience. But according to Genesis 2, if as you say it came after Genesis 1, Lucy would not have had conscience. And according to Romans 5, death reigned from Adam (as opposed to from creation) - so, assuming we are talking about spiritual death - Lucy was spiritually alive?

 

[Dan1988]

Thing about Genesis is that the whole book is full of both literal and non-literal passages. On top of that a lot of the cultural context behind the text has been lost to history.

God has appointed men to teach and explain how to apply the whole counsel of God to our lives. Ordinary Church members don't have the time to study the Bible, because we're busy and committed to our work.

The Bible is Gods perfect, living, inerrant eternal Word. It's the most powerful thing in the universe, the more we study and learn about God the more we realize how little we actually know. We can spend eternity learning about Him and still never learn everything.

God gave us His Word in a way that will only make sense to His children, it's foolishness to those who are perishing. I would just like to encourage you to continue studying the Bible, I appreciate many things don't sound right or fair from our perspective but I'm sure we will come to understand and love His Word more as we continue on our journey of discovery.

 

[olgamc]

Here's the gospel coalition:

The Origin of Sin

The question of the origin of Sin asks what was the cause of Adam’s sin, by which the human race fell from righteousness to condemnation.

www.thegospelcoalition.org

They talk about Satan's sin prior to the fall.

Even answers in Genesis recognizes sin before the fall as well.

Very conservative organizations, and Bible scholars alike in academia, it's very common that you'll find the understanding that there was sin before the fall.

Thank you for the link. Some quotes from that article:

"Sin therefore did not originate in the human nature as God made it but resulted when Adam was tempted by the evil serpent through his wife. Once Adam had sinned, the entire human race fell with him, losing the original righteousness" - yes!

"On the basis of Scripture, it is certain that sin did not first start on earth but in heaven" - exactly what I was saying, in the spiritual world, not in the physical world.

"Neither was anything made by God evil in any way, as Genesis 1:31 declares: “God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good.” - my point exactly

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok. You entirely missed the difference between sin and evil. But ok. Let's say you are right and God created a world with evil in it and called it good because for whatever reason He did not care that the world was evil, He just cared that it worked. I very very deeply disagree with this, but fine.

So following your logic, Lucy gets saved because she is a person. Let's keep going up the family tree. Lucy's grandma also gets saved because she is also a person? Lucy's grandma's grandma, who is an ape gets saved because she is a person? An ameba gets saved because it is a person? Surely there has to be a change from an animal to a person at some point in history?

I don't think I'd refer to Adams grandma as evil. Though she was sinful. Sorry I'm not following here.

I would say that Lucy may get saved. We can't say for sure, but presumably a loving God would give her the opportunity.

An amoeba isn't a human being. So I don't see why an amoeba would need to be saved. Amoebas don't sin. So I don't think I'd go back that far. But yes at some point, if we kept going back and back and back in time, eventually people would stop being people, and the subject of salvation would become irrelevant, just as it's not really meaningful to talk about if ants or caterpillars would go to heaven if they died today. Some topics just aren't meaningful.