- Apr 10, 2021
- 67
- 34
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Widowed
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Thank you. Much appreciatedI answered it the best way that I could. I am not the best at explaining my thoughts.
So, here, this is basically my belief in a nutshell from an Episcopalian like me, except I'm not a scientist like this person.
The Origins of Life: An Episcopal View
I would have said it's quite disingenuous to ignore the teachings of Paul and Jesus who both quote from Genesis, but it is not disingenuous to discuss reconciling their position with the idea of theistic evolution.
1 Cor 15 tells us that as a man came death (Adam) by a man has also came the resurrection of the dead (Jesus).
If evolution is true we have to consider changing this to mean that by mankind sin entered the world, then how can the analogy be continued unless we say by mankind that the world was redeemed. This isn't the case, it's redeemed by Jesus, one man.
Well the explanation of Jesus's death is explained by Paul by referring to Adam so it is important to what we believe as Christians.First the Bible has been seen wrongly because people act like knowledge at one time, this time in the ancient world is stagnant and can not change. Secondly seeing the Bible as literal. Thirdly as if the English language is the language of antiquity. Fourthly as if the ancients understood things the way modern man does.
1 Corinthians has nothing to doing with viewing the Bible the wrong way. Your right though we suffer the consequences but not the guilt of the first sin of Adam and Eve, which is called Ancestral sin.
I could care less how humans came about, my life is one of a Christian not an orginist
Sure.Hello!
I have a question and I would appreciate the input of the good people of this fine internet community!
My question is, is evolution compatible with a belief in Christianity?
So for some background to my research on this, I understand there is strict creationism (Genesis is literal), then there is the position that it is just a story, and that life evolved through theistic evolution. It's even said that Genesis creation was never to be taken at least fully literally.
So here is my thing, if evolution is true, why did Paul say,
'For Adam was first formed, then Eve.' 1 Tim 2:13.
It is clear that Paul believed in a literal creation of Adam, then Eve.
So if Paul is making it clear that it is not a story, but it's true, how can theistic evolution be reconciled as a genuine Christian belief?
Hello!
I have a question and I would appreciate the input of the good people of this fine internet community!
My question is, is evolution compatible with a belief in Christianity?
So for some background to my research on this, I understand there is strict creationism (Genesis is literal), then there is the position that it is just a story, and that life evolved through theistic evolution. It's even said that Genesis creation was never to be taken at least fully literally.
So here is my thing, if evolution is true, why did Paul say,
'For Adam was first formed, then Eve.' 1 Tim 2:13.
It is clear that Paul believed in a literal creation of Adam, then Eve.
So if Paul is making it clear that it is not a story, but it's true, how can theistic evolution be reconciled as a genuine Christian belief?
Because he was first. Thats logical. If you had be first, the sin would enter the world through you. Its nothing mysterious.The verse says that by one man sin entered the world.
But thats not the doctrine of the original sin. The doctrine of original sin is that we all sinned in Adam and therefore there is some generational guilt just because we are his children. That we bear his sin.That refers to the first sin, which is the original, because it's the first.
You did not read the link properly. The link was about the doctrine of the original sin - this doctrine is a wrong translation of Augustine. 1 Tim 2:13 just mentions the order of creation so it has nothing to do with it.Your link hinges on the idea that one word has been misinterpreted by Augustine in one verse (Romans 5:12). (Think back to 1 Tim 2:13).
Yes, its a funny story. In the times of Paul, it was a generally accepted fact that female's fertility is hidden in their hair. Therefore the longer hair they had, the more fertile they were supposed to be. It transformed into idea that hair are women's reproductive organ.I'm not sure how we got to this place, I had a quick recap and it appears you were saying that Paul could quote Genesis as any other myth (you tied this in with something about long hair on men being a medical Greek myth).
If you have some kind of anxiety imagining that not everything in the Bible happened in the physical world exactly as written, then the natural sciences are not for you, at the moment.I get it: evolution (theistic or otherwise) can only be incorporated into Christianity if we rewrite the Bible. This was pretty much what I was thinking. Thanks for your input
Thats fine, because there is no original sin. Its just a tradition based on Augustine's mistake.
AUGNET : 1311 Greek language
Augustine's mistake about original sin - Gentle Wisdom
The concept of original sin has slightly different variations but they all point to the same thing, which is that we inheret our sin nature from Adam. The only way someone would want to deny this is because they also want to deny creationism.Because he was first. Thats logical. If you had be first, the sin would enter the world through you. Its nothing mysterious.
But thats not the doctrine of the original sin. The doctrine of original sin is that we all sinned in Adam and therefore there is some generational guilt just because we are his children. That we bear his sin.
You did not read the link properly. The link was about the doctrine of the original sin - this doctrine is a wrong translation of Augustine. 1 Tim 2:13 just mentions the order of creation so it has nothing to do with it.
Yes, its a funny story. In the times of Paul, it was a generally accepted fact that female's fertility is hidden in their hair. Therefore the longer hair they had, the more fertile they were supposed to be. It transformed into idea that hair are women's reproductive organ.
Therefore it was shameful for a man to have this women's reproductive organ (long hair).
Paul takes this obviously wrong idea and says "its what the nature teaches us".
If you have some kind of anxiety imagining that not everything in the Bible happened in the physical world exactly as written, then the natural sciences are not for you, at the moment.
Later in your life you can base your faith on something more robust than just the literal reading of the English Bible. For example on the spirit in you, your own walking with God etc.
It will still be Christianity, but not the fundamentalist American branch of it.
Summary: Christianity is compatible with evolution (and other natural sciences like astronomy, physics etc.), because the basics of Christianity are very simple and the spiritual realities are more important than the physical one or than the ancient cosmology.
But the literal reading of the Bible or taking every word in the Bible as dictated by God, probably not. Its as incompatible as the ancient cosmology is incompatible with the ISS circling around our heads right now.
My short opinion is, WE CAN NOT COMPROMISE THE BIBLICAL TRUTH FOR WHATEVER EVERY AGE BRINGS.Hello!
I have a question and I would appreciate the input of the good people of this fine internet community!
My question is, is evolution compatible with a belief in Christianity?
So for some background to my research on this, I understand there is strict creationism (Genesis is literal), then there is the position that it is just a story, and that life evolved through theistic evolution. It's even said that Genesis creation was never to be taken at least fully literally.
So here is my thing, if evolution is true, why did Paul say,
'For Adam was first formed, then Eve.' 1 Tim 2:13.
It is clear that Paul believed in a literal creation of Adam, then Eve.
So if Paul is making it clear that it is not a story, but it's true, how can theistic evolution be reconciled as a genuine Christian belief?
I think that one of the reasons why someone might want to reconcile evolution with the Bible is not because they are convinced by the arguments for it, but they possibly don't want their faith to seem radical to people who do believe in evolution.My short opinion is, WE CAN NOT COMPROMISE THE BIBLICAL TRUTH FOR WHATEVER EVERY AGE BRINGS.
And here is my question, how much sure we are in evolution that we should worry to reconcile it with the Bible?
What did the process of Adam's creation look like? When we bake a cake, we start with the ingredients. The ingredients go through several phases before the cake forms. God formed Adam from dust. What were the phases between dust and Adam?
Not just of humans. Every physical creature has the similar traits of behavior, you can find the same things in the animal kingdom, too.You don't have to teach children how to lie and be selfish, these things come as part of the human nature.
The NT is full of references to Adam. Paul calls Jesus the second Adam. He was talking about someone he believed to have existed (Adam and Jesus).
You can't have evolution unless you are willing to ignore Paul's explanation about Jesus's purpose on the cross.
Hello!
I have a question and I would appreciate the input of the good people of this fine internet community!
My question is, is evolution compatible with a belief in Christianity?
So here is my thing, if evolution is true, why did Paul say,
'For Adam was first formed, then Eve.' 1 Tim 2:13.
It is clear that Paul believed in a literal creation of Adam, then Eve.
So if Paul is making it clear that it is not a story, but it's true, how can theistic evolution be reconciled as a genuine Christian belief?
This conversation has already been had on this thread. Let's say Adam evolved then how did he know how to talk how did he learn a language and what relationship did he have with his mother who was an animal and where did Eve come from?Not just of humans. Every physical creature has the similar traits of behavior, you can find the same things in the animal kingdom, too.
In humans it more evil, because humans can think of it more deeply and prepare it better. While animals do it more impulsively.
Evolution as such does not cancel the existence of Adam. Adam could very well be the first human as the Bible says (or only an archetype). Only the process of his creation would not be so primitive (God taking dust, breathing into it...), but more scientifically complex.
Exactly it is quite disingenuous to take a book that is quite ancient and ascribe modern notions to said book plus acting like what the English translation is actually what the book really says in the original language
Except when God makes a cake, He says, let there be cake, and it instantly exists.
Yes.
Genesis says that God created the universe - that it was his doing, his intention and will.
It doesn't say HOW God created.
So God created trees - they could have all instantly materialised instantly, fully grown, or the saplings could have appeared when God spoke and the trees grew over time. The account reads as though it all happened instantly and within a short space of time, but it could all have taken thousands of years.
This has nothing to do with the fact that mankind disobeyed God, and have been doing so ever since, and that God himself, in Jesus, died as a perfect sacrifice for our sin.
Believing that animals - elephants, rhinos etc - just appeared, fully grown or that they evolved over time does not in any way change the fact that people are sinners and cannot come to the Father except through Jesus.
We are made new in Jesus, 2 Corinthians 5:17, given every spiritual blessing through Jesus, Ephesians 1:3, are born again through the Holy Spirit, John 3:3, who was sent by Jesus to his disciples and who draws us to Jesus.
Evolution cannot change, nor destroy, these facts.
You raise a good point.Except evolution exists for the sole purpose of negating any need for the existence of God, and replace Him with time and chance. Trying to make the Bible fit the metaphysical philosophy of naturalistic materialism called evolution, is a mistake.
The evolutionists don’t respect you for attempting to do so, either.
Evolution and the Bible are diametrically opposed.
Adams lineage is a pile of dirt, not a lineage of common descent that ended with Adam descending from simian ancestors that eventually became human.
And Eves lineage is being cloned from Adams rib.
Scripture makes it clear that death didn’t exist before the curse on creation the fall of Adam, which precludes millions of years of survival of the fittest, and all the lives and deaths needed to evolve into higher life forms and then mankind over millions of years.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?