Evolution's doctrine on origins vs symbolism in John 6 and Matt 16

[BobRyan]

First the "Elephant in living room" when trying to smuggle darwinism into Genesis 1 and 2-
I would never call the historic facts that scripture tells us about - "myth" - so then

1. virgin birth
2. resurrection of Christ
3. Seven day creation week
4. The flood

Are all real literal historic events.

We can see in those examples above that although the Bible 'is not a science text book' telling us how to do all the miracles that God does in real history

And while that is obviously true and evidence to all - it creates a huge problem for evolutionists who are not so happy with those "details"
Their solution? try to equivocate between the non-fictional literal statements above - -- vs the symbolism employed in the Bible.

That means thatl "extreme effort" must be made to avoid the problem for evolution seen at the top of this post - if one needs evolution which gets people into pulling the symbolism of John 6 into the discussion about evolution and those historic events at the top of this post.

============================= symbolism

Now we know in Matt 16 "bread" and leaven were used by Christ as "symbols" for the "TEACHING" of the Pharisees.
We also know that in John 6 Christ uses similar symbols for bread and wine connecting them to 'teaching" saying His "WORD is what has Spirit and Life" for the believer.

And obviously neither the "faithful believers" nor the "faithless" group in John 6 "bite Christ". Nor does that happen among the disciples at the last Supper - because if they did - there would be no Gethsemane event and no crucifixion of Christ on Calvary.

============================================================================

In the context in John 6 Jesus is talking about the same flesh as himself - his blood, and also His being the BREAD that came down out of heaven (a reference to Manna in the wilderness). Flesh and blood is being used as a symbol.

Jesus said that if you want eternal life - bite my flesh - drink my blood... Those who take him too literally leave.
Jesus said that eating literal flesh is worthless - it is His WORDS that are "spirit and are life"
Peter gets the message "you have the WORDS of eternal life"

John 6:

54 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me,...​

60 So then many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, “This statement is very unpleasant; who can listen to it?”​

61 But Jesus, aware that His disciples were complaining about this, said to them,... 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh provides no benefit; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit, and are life.​

...​

66 As a result of this many of His disciples left, and would no longer walk with Him. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, “You do not want to leave also, do you?” 68 Simon Peter answered Him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life.​

And his statement that eating literal flesh explains why not even his faithful followers that stayed with Him - were biting Christ.

They got the message that it is the WORDs of Christ that He was speaking of.
Neither the "hard saying" group in John 6 nor Peter and the rest of the 12 - bite Christ in John 6 and everyone admits this.

The same is true for Matt 16 and the symbol of bread and leaven once "again" used as the smbol for "teaching" where - again the disciples are rebuked for taking Christ too literally --

Matt 16:
5 And the disciples came to the other side of the sea, but they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6 And Jesus said to them, “Watch out and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7 They began to discuss this among themselves, saying, “He said that because we did not bring any bread.” 8 But Jesus, aware of this, said, “You men of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? 9 Do you not yet understand nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets you picked up? 10 Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many large baskets you picked up? 11 How is it that you do not understand that I did not speak to you about bread? But beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12 Then they understood that He did not say to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

By contrast: No such "Christ explains the true meaning behind the symbol in the text" element is present in the creation account where you wish to insert other ideas , nor is it present in the legal code of Ex 20:11. Yet you are taking John 6 as if you can ignore Jesus' explanation of the symbols and equate it to Ex 20:11 that you then insert symbolism with zero evidence in the legal code for doing it.

As if we would not notice the difference?

Apparently that is the "hope" for that solution of conflating the symbolism in John 6 with historic events such as

1. virgin birth
2. resurrection of Christ
3. Seven day creation week
4. The flood

 

[BobRyan]

The entire 6000 years of the sin experiment on earth provides data/evidence regarding those questions and we get a glimpse into the accusations made about God's character in the book of Job chapters 1 and 2. All the information/lessons learned here on Earth continue to be very useful in heaven leaving no room at all to question God's motives, character, kind intention.

Doctrine (teaching about God) in heaven, matters and ensures the stability of the entire universe.

If the Bible is true then
1. Man is directly created by God, sinless, holy, mature, very talented, highly capable, at the peak of our ability and in close relationship to God. Man walks and talks with God in the Garden before sin.
2. Man sins - but it is a very simple test God gives Adam and Eve - and still they fail. God was giving mankind every opportunity to succeed. God shares no blame in that. Satan is unmasked a bit in that deception.
3. Having little to no excuse for rebellion -- yet God chooses to sacrifice His own life on behalf of mankind and open a door of salvation through the incarnation of God the son
4. The Word of God is not misleading but conveys truth exactly as it reads.
5. None of this appears in popular science text books on evolution

IF evolution is true instead
1. Man is merely an accident in evolution
2. Some hominid bashing in his ration of monkey brains in a cave one day - is suddenly and innexplicably charged with "sin"
3. God Himself must now die for that creature or else abondon humans to the lake of fire.
yeah... makes no sense... "I know"
4. Items one and two do not appear in the Bible - but they are in certain text books, they are not repeatable, observable or testable.

 

[BeyondET]

More like the lining of the uterus being used, discarded waste, like dirt.

 

[Diamond7]

1. virgin birth
2. resurrection of Christ
3. Seven day creation week
4. The flood

Of course the virgin birth and the resurrection create a problem for non-believers. We do not expect people to believe what we can not prove to be true.

The literal seven-day creation week does not present a problem because a day represents all of time and all mysteries. For example, they represent different stages in the evolution of the universe and humanity. Which is no longer a mystery because now this is well on its way to being understood.

The flood is what it is. I do not see why that would be a problem for anyone. It is more of a problem for Christians that do not want to give up their traditions in light of the new information that we now have regarding this.