A prerequisite for believing in evolution is

[Blueberry Sponge]

A prerequisite for believing in evolution is this: You MUST deny the infallibility of the Bible, whether knowingly or unknowingly.

 

[Risen Tree]

Your poll-creating skills need some work. Remember, an unbiased poll captures all possible opinions without slighting any of them.

 

[Bushido216]

You only have to deny the literal interpretation.

 

[troodon]

 

[Risen Tree]

The funny thing is, I was just about to start a related topic; perhaps this is the the thread to do it in.

Some of you have noted that belief in evolution should not compromise one's faith. So be it. However, one encounters some problems when perusing the Apostle Paul's repeated messages that just as Adam was the man who broke the curse of sin into the world, Jesus was the one who cured it. How is this supposed to work? Paul assigns the same truth value to the personhood of Adam and Jesus. Is one supposed to assume that since Adam is mythical, so is Jesus? If so, the very element which Christianity hinges upon is destroyed.

However, Adam means "man." Taking this interpretation, Paul's message reads that man opened Pandorra's box of sin, and Christ shut it. Now this allows for open-endedness without compromising the divinity of Christ. It does not say where, how, or when man gave birth to sin; it simply says that it happened. Note that the passages never say that Adam gave rise to sin in the Garden of Eden; it merely says that he gave rise to sin.

Another point is this: YEC's commonly argue that if evolution occurred, then murder, rape, etc. are not wrong since they have been around for much longer than humans have been. First of all, IIRC, people are the only creatures on the planet that are known to commit rape. Second, Christianity teaches that individuals should take responsibility for their actions and not blame it on others.

To be frank, I'm torn on this one. What do you guys think?

 

[notto]

To be frank, I'm torn on this one. What do you guys think?

I think you should rewrite the options for the poll

 

[Bushido216]

Anyone ever notice how first people say that Adam was the first man, yet only those descended from Adam can be saved? If Adam was the first man, aren't we all descended from him?

Anyone else ever notice that everyone points at a direct lineage between Adam & Jesus as being special. Isn't there a direct lineage between me & Adam then?

Seriously. Perhaps God made man in his spiritual image and only those who are spiritually descended from Adam can be saved...

 

[Risen Tree]

You know, when Adam is translated as "man," the fact that we descended from Adam reduces to a tautology.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

However, Adam means "man." Taking this interpretation, Paul's message reads that man opened Pandorra's box of sin

Correction: by ONE man. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men ...

...and Christ shut it. Now this allows for open-endedness without compromising the divinity of Christ.

Being consistent with the "same truth value" you would then end up with many christs instead of one Christ.

It does not say where, how, or when man gave birth to sin; it simply says that it happened.

Paul attests to the Scriptures, which include Genesis 3, as did Jesus and the other NT writers. Genesis 3 tells us where, how, and when; as does Paul in the following NT passages:

Note that the passages never say that Adam gave rise to sin in the Garden of Eden; it merely says that he gave rise to sin.

Paul is more specific than that.

1 Tim. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

2 Cor. 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty...

These are direct references to the detailed account given in Genesis 3.

You know, when Adam is translated as "man," the fact that we descended from Adam reduces to a tautology.

The New Testament differentiates between adam and anthropos in the Greek so that there’s no "needless" repetition of terms.

Wherefore, as by one man [anthropos] sin entered into the world ... Nevertheless death reigned from Adam [adam] to Moses ... Romans 5:12-14;

For since by man [anthropos] came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam [adam] all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:21,22, and so on in the NT.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

Anyone ever notice how first people say that Adam was the first man, yet only those descended from Adam can be saved? If Adam was the first man, aren't we all descended from him?

Adam was the first man, all humans are descended from him, and only humans can be saved.

Anyone else ever notice that everyone points at a direct lineage between Adam & Jesus as being special.

It's special because it reveals that Jesus is man as well as God.

Isn't there a direct lineage between me & Adam then?

Yes, but we're not also God as Jesus is.

Seriously. Perhaps God made man in his spiritual image and only those who are spiritually descended from Adam can be saved...

No no no no no no no. We're PYSICALLY descended from Adam. Those who are saved are SPIRITUALLY descended from the "last Adam", Christ (1 Corinthians 15:45-47).

 

[Buck72]

Excellent Blueberry Sponge - well said.

Remember that to adopt a non-literal perspective is to step outside the boundary of protection that the word itself grants us against foul doctrine:

Eph 4:14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming;

1Ti 6:3 If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,

1Ti 6:4 he is conceited and understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions,


2Ti 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.

2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

2Ti 4:4 and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

What is being said here? If I take this word literally, I am cautioned to hold fast to the word of God and not be distracted by the latest trend that has swept the world in its quest to replace God with falsehood.

Non-literally, I then have the liberty to believe as I wish, obviously Paul was writing to Timothy about a select group of people with a specific "doctrine" that was fouling up a particular church - not to be confused with modern times (I write in jest here).

The FACT is: God's word is under 24/7 assault from the devil and the world and our sinful flesh does not want to hearken to God because we are born into sin, through Adam, to run amok and seek after our own ways. It is ONLY by grace that any of us are saved, THROUGH FAITH, even which that is a gift from God.

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Where then does this faith come from?

Rom 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

I would consider that the word of God is in fact the source, while evolution is merely a theory by which man has sought to find answers of his origin in fossils, rocks, and notional speculation of universal origins. God has already told us where everything came from - He even WROTE IT WITH HIS FINGER ON THE STONE TABLETS AT SINAI (Ten Commandments):

Exo 20:11 "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

God's word tells us that we can know these things with confidence:

1Co 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,

1Co 2:13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.

1Co 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

1Co 2:15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.

1Co 2:16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.

More words to constrain ourselves by, that we may be found by Christ on the last day walking in faith...not in speculative notions that contradict what He has given us;

*** 1:9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.

1Co 1:18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

1Co 1:19 For it is written, "I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE."

1Co 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

1Co 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

1Co 1:22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom;

1Co 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness,

1Co 1:24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

1Co 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

1Co 1:26 For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;

1Co 1:27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong,

1Co 1:28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are,

1Co 1:29 so that no man may boast before God.

AMEN, AND AMEN.

 

[Risen Tree]

Correction: by ONE man. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men ...

The word "man" can either mean one male human being or mankind as a whole.

Being consistent with the "same truth value" you would then end up with many christs instead of one Christ.

Obviously this can't be, as Scripture clearly reveals that there is one Christ.

Paul attests to the Scriptures, which include Genesis 3, as did Jesus and the other NT writers. Genesis 3 tells us where, how, and when; as does Paul in the following NT passages:

Perhaps this was their allegorical way of explaining evolution, assuming it occurred. How the heck could somebody explain DNA in 25 B.C., let alone mutations?

Paul is more specific than that.

1 Tim. 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

2 Cor. 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty...

These are direct references to the detailed account given in Genesis 3.

Again, these could be allegorical references.

The New Testament differentiates between adam and anthropos in the Greek so that there’s no "needless" repetition of terms.

Wherefore, as by one man [anthropos] sin entered into the world ... Nevertheless death reigned from Adam [adam] to Moses ... Romans 5:12-14;

For since by man [anthropos] came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam [adam] all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Corinthians 15:21,22, and so on in the NT.

What's the Greek for "man" when used as a synonym to "mankind"?

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

The word "man" can either mean one male human being or mankind as a whole.

Not in the context of the Romans 5 passage. Try it for yourself; read through the passage and substitute mankind for man. You'll find that Jesus is "one mankind" in verse 15. Which indicates to me that if you're going to allegorize the creation account and remain consistent, you'll have to allegorize the revelation of Jesus in the NT to where you end up with a form of pantheism (Jesus is one mankind).

Your statement is true but it's a generalization that ignores the specific wording of a biblical context.

 

[Risen Tree]

Not in the context of the Romans 5 passage. Try it for yourself; read through the passage and substitute mankind for man. You'll find that Jesus is "one mankind" in verse 15. Which indicates to me that if you're going to allegorize the creation account and remain consistent, you'll have to allegorize the revelation of Jesus in the NT to where you end up with a form of pantheism (Jesus is one mankind).

Your statement is true but it's a generalization that ignores the specific wording of a biblical context.

So what now? Is Adam just an allegorical reference? Was Paul lying altoghether?

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

No, Adam was a real individual. Paul wasn't lying at all.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Maybe I am stupid, but I don't really understand the poll.

Is the bible infalible? Of course not. God is not the bible, however.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Blueberry, I posted this some time recently in this forum:

A survey in the UK of clergy (anglican, catholic, etc) found that over 80% are in agreement that Adam and Eve were not actual people.

 

[Blueberry Sponge]

A survey in the UK of clergy (anglican, catholic, etc) found that over 80% are in agreement that Adam and Eve were not actual people.

And yet 100% of that 80% descended from those 2 actual people. So much for popular opinions.

 

[Risen Tree]

Blueberry, I posted this some time recently in this forum:

A survey in the UK of clergy (anglican, catholic, etc) found that over 80% are in agreement that Adam and Eve were not actual people.

This is the same group of people that rejected the validity of some crucial Scriptures years ago.

 

[Ark Guy]

You only have to deny the literal interpretation.

Why should I deny the literal interpretation if the NT writers didn't?

Why should I filter Genesis through evolutionISM?