If Genesis isn't "literal", then what is?

[Vance]

The first human to knowingly go against the will of God. The Bible calls him "Adam". Evolutionary creationists have no problem with that.

Personally, I would even have little problem with Adam being a typology symbol for "Mankind" (which is, not surprisingly, what "adam" means), although he could have been an individual as well. There is nothing incongruous about Paul referring to a past TYPE, in the form of an individual, to a current literal individual Jesus. Another possibility is that he was the first of the line leading to the Israelite nation (which would fit with God's method of working through a given people as a sort of crucible for all of humankind).

But, your point is well-taken, there are MANY ways to view Adam consistent with both Scripture AND evolution. Which is why it is not surprising that the majority of Christians worldwide DO accept evolution, and so many Christian denominations have stated clearly that they do not see any direct contradiction between Scripture and the evolution of humans. Should we imagine that all of those denominations and church leaders just forgot that part and, if we pointed it out, they would say "Doh! we forgot that Paul bit . . ."

:0)

 

[Scotishfury09]

so what about paul.... if by one man sin entered (who was this one man)

At what point is a baby considered accountable to its actions? Now consider the mental and spiritual growth of a baby as an analogy for human life. At one point we were not capable of understanding sin and the death it causes, but eventually we did. Whatever point that was, bam, there's your Adam.

 

[Vance]

At what point is a baby considered accountable to its actions? Now consider the mental and spiritual growth of a baby as an analogy for human life. At one point we were not capable of understanding sin and the death it causes, but eventually we did. Whatever point that was, bam, there's your Adam.

Very true. Sin is the conscious rebellion against God, a level of pride and selfishness that leads to disobedience. Animals can't sin, even when they kill (for example), because they, for want of a better phrase, don't know any better. At some point, humans "knew better" and their actions after that point became potentially sinful.

Consider one little bit of possible typological and symbolic language. At a point, Adam is "created". Then, AFTER Adam is created, he is placed INTO the Garden. So, Adam was created outside of the Garden, but we are not told how long "adam" was there, or what was the trigger to put "adam" in the Garden. What was life for "adam" (possibly mankind) like outside of the Garden? Did God commune with "adam" then? Was "adam", at that point, able to sin (meaning having sufficient knowledge of God or His nature)? What if "adam" DID sin? There was no Garden to be kicked out of, and he was already "out there".

There is a LOT more going on historically with all of this than we are being told, and I think that is because there is a lot we don't NEED to know, and the way God allowed the story to be told gives us all the essential information about God and His relationship to Mankind that we need for salvation and for His Gospel message.

Just more food for thought.

 

[jckstraw72]

Scriptures plainly state that death entered the world by man's sin, evolution says otherwise.

 

[Mallon]

Scriptures plainly state that death entered the world by man's sin, evolution says otherwise.

Except for the part about the Tree of Life, the need to eat, "In the day that you eat of [the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil], you shall surely die", and the strong implications throughout Romans 5 and 6 that the death Paul is speaking about is spiritual in nature.
But other than that, yeah.

 

[jckstraw72]

Except for the part about the Tree of Life, the need to eat, "In the day that you eat of [the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil], you shall surely die", and the strong implications throughout Romans 5 and 6 that the death Paul is speaking about is spiritual in nature.
But other than that, yeah.

it has been taught since day one that no death of any kind existed before the Fall

Wherefore we must say that the first men were indeed so created, that if they had not sinned, they would not have experienced any kind of death; but that, having become sinners, they were so punished with death, that whatsoever sprang from their stock should also be punished with the same death. City of God Book 13.3 to quotes just one.

also
The Wisdom of Solomon 1:13 For God made not death: neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living.
The Wisdom of Solomon 1:14 For he created all things, that they might have their being: and the generations of the world were healthful; and there is no poison of destruction in them, nor the kingdom of death upon the earth:

 

[Mallon]

it has been taught since day one that no death of any kind existed before the Fall

I guess I just don't follow your chosen teaching tradition, then.

Wherefore we must say that the first men were indeed so created, that if they had not sinned, they would not have experienced any kind of death; but that, having become sinners, they were so punished with death, that whatsoever sprang from their stock should also be punished with the same death. City of God Book 13.3 to quotes just one.

also
The Wisdom of Solomon 1:13 For God made not death: neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living.
The Wisdom of Solomon 1:14 For he created all things, that they might have their being: and the generations of the world were healthful; and there is no poison of destruction in them, nor the kingdom of death upon the earth:

Sorry, those books aren't a part of my canon.

 

[Molal]

I guess I just don't follow your chosen teaching tradition, then.


Sorry, those books aren't a part of my canon.

Not part of my religious tradition either.

So, no comment.

 

[Vance]

I dislike using words like "plainly" or "obviously" or "clearly" when it comes to a great deal of Scripture.

Sin did, indeed, enter into the world through "adam", whether that was an individual or humanity in general, but as we see, that is not contradicted by evolutionary development. And the whole "no death before the Fall" bit is just a non-starter, since there WAS death of some type no matter how you look at it. There are many ways to read that text, and I choose one that happens to fit with the rest of the evidence.

 

[jckstraw72]

There are many ways to read that text, and I choose one that happens to fit with the rest of the evidence.

theres many ways to read any text, but the best is the way the author intended it

 

[theFijian]

Scriptures plainly state that death entered the world by man's sin, evolution says otherwise.

Evolution says something about sin?

 

[Vance]

theres many ways to read any text, but the best is the way the author intended it

Oh, yes, exactly! I am very glad you recognize that fact since many creationists here have said over the years that they don't care how it was originally intended, they will go with the "plain reading" (whatever that is to them). This is important since the ANE cultures would NOT have read the early Genesis texts as strict literal history, and the human authors would not have expected them to.

At the same time, we do have to keep in mind that we are not obligated to believe what they believed about every aspect of what was being written. For example, all of the Biblical authors would have been geocentrists, and so they would have written and read the texts from that perspective. Since they were not writing to make scientific claims, necessarily, that does not mean they were really "wrong", their points were to convey God's powers and actions, not describe how the solar system work. But, we can say that they were wrong in their belief about the solar system, and thus wrote in a way that we would not today, but that what they wrote was still not in "error" even where it describes things geocentrically.

A bit complicated, but the point is that Scripture is TRUE, even where it is not meant to be strictly literal science or history.

 

[Bushido216]

Scriptures plainly state that death entered the world by man's sin, evolution says otherwise.

1. If Adam & Eve weren't aware of Good & Evil before eating of the Tree, how could they be expected to know that disobeying God was Evil?

2. Adam & Eve didn't die that day, obviously, as the Bible would've been much shorter otherwise.

3. If no death existed in the world before Adam & Eve, how did carniverous species survive?

 

[NathanCGreen]

3. If no death existed in the world before Adam & Eve, how did carniverous species survive?

before sin and the curse entered in this world, animals did not eat each other, full stop. They were given plants to eat, if you read Genesis. I don't know how or why you missed it..

 

[Jadis40]

before sin and the curse entered in this world, animals did not eat each other, full stop. They were given plants to eat, if you read Genesis. I don't know how or why you missed it..

These claims really aren't supported in the natural world itself. Look at a shark, everything about it screams out predator, and it always has been. So, given the example of a shark, yes, there was death in the world from the very beginning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shark

So, if you take an exception from a creature that lives in the water, then it stands to reason there were carnivores, like tigers and lions from the beginning too.

If animals were vegetarians like sites like AiG like to put forth, then why does the natural world that God made show animals whose very designs show otherwise?

 

[Bushido216]

before sin and the curse entered in this world, animals did not eat each other, full stop. They were given plants to eat, if you read Genesis. I don't know how or why you missed it..

Jadis said it better than me. Why would the Lord create populations of organisms that are incredibly illsuited to being herbivores, and then force them into a herbivorous diet?

ETA: Not to mention, I'm pretty certain the plants would've considered being eaten as "death".

 

[jckstraw72]

1. If Adam & Eve weren't aware of Good & Evil before eating of the Tree, how could they be expected to know that disobeying God was Evil?

im not sure how this relates, but the Church Fathers teach that they had some knowledge of good and evil and were intended to grow ever coser with God becoming one day prepared to eat from the tree. In essence, they ate too soon -- like someone who would partake of the Eucharist without baptism, chrismation, confession, etc

2. Adam & Eve didn't die that day, obviously, as the Bible would've been much shorter otherwise.

but they did die .....

3. If no death existed in the world before Adam & Eve, how did carniverous species survive?

they weren't carnivorous. you are taking what you know of the world today and casting it back onto paradise ... doesnt work.

 

[Molal]

Jadis said it better than me. Why would the Lord create populations of organisms that are incredibly illsuited to being herbivores, and then force them into a herbivorous diet?

ETA: Not to mention, I'm pretty certain the plants would've considered being eaten as "death".

Happy Birthday!!!!

 

[Bushido216]

im not sure how this relates, but the Church Fathers teach that they had some knowledge of good and evil and were intended to grow ever coser with God becoming one day prepared to eat from the tree. In essence, they ate too soon -- like someone who would partake of the Eucharist without baptism, chrismation, confession, etc

That's fair enough, but I do recall reading that Adam & Eve were only aware of having done wrong, after they ate of the fruit, clearly implying that they didn't know before hand.

but they did die .....

And so who parented Cain & Abel? Adam & Eve are written of AFTER the Fall and after eating the fruit. So tell me, if surely they would die, and they did not die, what gives?

they weren't carnivorous. you are taking what you know of the world today and casting it back onto paradise ... doesnt work.

I ask again.

1. Why would the Lord create organisms that would derive barely any nutritional value from plants and force them to be herbivores.

2. If no death was in the world before the Fall, then how did any non-photophage organism survive? Plants are living organisms, even if they're not cognizant of their surroundings, even herbivores would've had to starve.

 

[Bushido216]

Happy Birthday!!!!

Thanks chief.