[_ Old Earth _] If Adam had parents...

[jwu]

This is in response to John's signature:

If evolution happened, then death was widespread before man evolved. But if death preceded man and was not a result of Adam's sin, then sin is a fiction. If sin is a fiction, then we do not need a Savior.

[emphasis mine]

Isn't sin defined as disobeying God? Is there any Christian here who would say of himself that he never disobeyed God, and that "original sin" is the only sin that drags him down?

 

[John]

Isn't sin defined as disobeying God? Is there any Christian here who would say of himself that he never disobeyed God, and that "original sin" is the only sin that drags him down?

Disobeying the law/God yes. Everyone has sinned, Sin is inevitable it is human nature. The first Sin started it all and because of it we have death. If evolution were true then death would have happened billions of times before hand. Therefore sin would be a fiction.

 

[jwu]

If evolution were true then death would have happened billions of times before hand. Therefore sin would be a fiction.

I don't see how the latter follows from the former.

How is the definition of sin dependent on "original sin"? Doesn't simply disobeying God suffice to be a sinner, regardless of anything else?

 

[John]

well yes, the original sin was the turning point so even if it was just another sin it has significance being the first resulting in the decline of man and death. If Adam had parents it would have been their sin that doomed the human race so in this instance evolution would have voided Adams sin and Gods word because God said because of Adams sin we all die. If evolution were true then that sin is a fiction and we do not need a savior to save us from nothing.

 

[jwu]

well yes, the original sin was the turning point so even if it was just another sin it has significance being the first resulting in the decline of man and death. If Adam had parents it would have been their sin that doomed the human race so in this instance evolution would have voided Adams sin and Gods word because God said because of Adams sin we all die.

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
Adam didn't physically die on that day - that's telling us that it's not physical, but spiritual death that is at stake here. Hence the physical death implied by evolution (and digestion) is not relevant. Otherwise also keep in mind that physical death is necessary as a population control mechanism...and of course carnivores need something to eat as well.

If evolution were true then that sin is a fiction and we do not need a savior to save us from nothing.

So you're saying that unless there was a literal Adam 6000 years ago who ate from a literal special tree, one could walk around and disobey God at will without being a sinner? Even if God appeared right in front of one and said, "stop doing this, i command you so!" ?

 

[inhopeofglory]

Genesis is the foundation for our understanding of what sin is, how it came into this Universe, why and how it affects every man, woman, and child, and what its consequences are. Accept Evolution and you rip away that foundation, and thus the whole message of the Gospel - that Jesus came to redeem fallen humanity from sin and its consequences - is rendered meaningless. Because without the original sin to give us a starting point, how do we define sin to begin with? Why should we believe that sin has consequences if the Bible's foundational teaching on those consequences isn't to be believed? How and why is humanity to be understood as "fallen" if there was never a perfect, sinless, deathless state that we once fell from?

According to the Scriptures, the very reason we are inherently sinful is because of Adam. One of the primary consequences of sin is death, made universal through our shared link with Adam.

Romans 5:12: "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned..."
Romans 6:23a: "For the wages of sin is death..."
1 Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive."

Thus, according to the Scriptures, death came into the Universe because of sin, through Adam. Evolution, with its millions of years of death and suffering before Adam (and thus before the entrance of sin into this world), denies this. Which is correct, Evolution or the Bible? If one believes the Bible then the only conclusion is that Evolution is a lie.

Adam didn't physically die on that day - that's telling us that it's not physical, but spiritual death that is at stake here. Hence the physical death implied by evolution (and digestion) is not relevant.

Spiritual death, a separation of the human spirit from God, the Giver of life, occurred at the Fall, yes, but the Scripture is clear that physical death was also an inevitable result. "You shall surely die" (Genesis 2:17b) is our translation of the Hebrew idiom, literally "dying you shall die" - i.e. you will begin to die and continue dying until you are dead. Just as spiritual life will ultimately result in physical life (by this I mean eternal physical life, whether in Heaven or the lake of fire) in the resurrection, so spiritual death resulted in physical death in this age.

1 Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive."

In Adam all die... just spiritually? Or physically too?
In Christ all shall be made alive... just spiritually? Or physically too?

1 Corinthians 15:20-23: "But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming."

Have you ever wondered why we all die? Why we fight so hard against death? Death is called "the last enemy" in 1 Corinthians 15:26. Why is death an enemy if death is Evolution's friend, by which we were brought into being over millions of years, if indeed we were?

...and of course carnivores need something to eat as well.

What carnivores? Genesis 1:29-30: "And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for foodâ€Â; and it was so." Before the Fall there were no carnivores.

 

[Crying Rock]

Genesis 2:17:

"...but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die..."

I think the crux of the issue lies in Genesis 2:17: Up until gaining the knowledge of the difference between good and evil man could not sin. He didn't know what he should or shouldn't do. Therefore he couldn't be held accountable. From there, Adam's sin/ knowledge was imputed into all mankind, just as Christ's righteousness is imputed into all those that accept his work on the cross, and choose to live under that grace.

Man, we're gettin' all theological-like on the science board today. :D

Waz up with that! ;)

Seriously though, it's a nice to remember, at the end of the day, after we're done beating up on one another, that us Christians are still brothers, no matter how much we may disagree on certain issues.

:yes

 

[jwu]

Genesis is the foundation for our understanding of what sin is, how it came into this Universe, why and how it affects every man, woman, and child, and what its consequences are. Accept Evolution and you rip away that foundation, and thus the whole message of the Gospel - that Jesus came to redeem fallen humanity from sin and its consequences - is rendered meaningless.

Sin exists regardless of how it came into existence. If you believe in God and only read the book Exodus with the ten commandments, would you not come to the conclusion that e.g. stealing is bad and sin?

Because without the original sin to give us a starting point, how do we define sin to begin with? Why should we believe that sin has consequences if the Bible's foundational teaching on those consequences isn't to be believed?

It is to be believed - but that does not require a literal interpretation. IMHO "eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil" is a clear metaphor for the process of the human species developing a conscience. Once we had one, we were capable of sinning by doing bad things while knowing that they are bad.

How and why is humanity to be understood as "fallen" if there was never a perfect, sinless, deathless state that we once fell from?

There was one - before we became conscious of good and evil and thus became responsible for our actions. It never could possibly have been perfect though, even in a literal interpretation. Falling from grace implies a flaw, a perfect being cannot fall from grace by definition. Just "very good" s enough ;)

According to the Scriptures, the very reason we are inherently sinful is because of Adam. One of the primary consequences of sin is death, made universal through our shared link with Adam.

Romans 5:12: "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned..."
Romans 6:23a: "For the wages of sin is death..."
1 Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive."

One can refer to a metaphor just like any real thing or person.

Thus, according to the Scriptures, death came into the Universe because of sin, through Adam. Evolution, with its millions of years of death and suffering before Adam (and thus before the entrance of sin into this world), denies this. Which is correct, Evolution or the Bible? If one believes the Bible then the only conclusion is that Evolution is a lie.

Again, this requires the interpretation that it's physical death that the Bible refers to. A world without physical death however is illogical.

Adam didn't physically die on that day - that's telling us that it's not physical, but spiritual death that is at stake here. Hence the physical death implied by evolution (and digestion) is not relevant.

Spiritual death, a separation of the human spirit from God, the Giver of life, occurred at the Fall, yes, but the Scripture is clear that physical death was also an inevitable result. "You shall surely die" (Genesis 2:17b) is our translation of the Hebrew idiom, literally "dying you shall die" - i.e. you will begin to die and continue dying until you are dead. Just as spiritual life will ultimately result in physical life (by this I mean eternal physical life, whether in Heaven or the lake of fire) in the resurrection, so spiritual death resulted in physical death in this age.

That does not actually require the absence of physical death. It can simply be read as "from now on you are spiritually mortal, and will die (spiritually and hence for real) eventually".

1 Corinthians 15:22: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive."

In Adam all die... just spiritually? Or physically too?
In Christ all shall be made alive... just spiritually? Or physically too?

Yes, spiritually. What about the matter of my body that also belonged to other people during history, and will belong to other people's bodies in the future? What about proton decay? Physical bodies would be incomplete and eventually decay again. Unless they are faked from non-original matter...

Have you ever wondered why we all die? Why we fight so hard against death? Death is called "the last enemy" in 1 Corinthians 15:26. Why is death an enemy if death is Evolution's friend, by which we were brought into being over millions of years, if indeed we were?

Death is part of the mechanism of evolution, it cannot be called a "friend" in any meaningful way.

What carnivores? Genesis 1:29-30: "And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for foodâ€Â; and it was so." Before the Fall there were no carnivores.

And plants don't die physically?
Moreover, many carnivorous species are completely incapable of living on a vegetarian diet. Their teeth and digestive tracts are unsuitable for plants. Think about spiders. Snakes. Any parasite. Sharks. What did they eat, or how did they become the way they are now?

 

[inhopeofglory]

Up until gaining the knowledge of the difference between good and evil man could not sin. He didn't know what he should or shouldn't do.

Yes he did.

Genesis 1:20: "Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.â€Â" That's what he/they should do. Additionally, Adam was put in the Garden of Eden "to tend and keep it." (Genesis 2:15)

Genesis 2:16-17: "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.â€Â" That's what he shouldn't do.

Sin exists regardless of how it came into existence. If you believe in God and only read the book Exodus with the ten commandments, would you not come to the conclusion that e.g. stealing is bad and sin?

My point was that the Bible itself bases everything - the entire Gospel message - on the understanding that the early chapters of Genesis are factual, not mythical, or metaphor, or anything else. Rip away that foundation, and the rest of the Bible crumbles. I don't want to base my faith, my life, on a nice story. I want to base it on fact, on the truth.

The Ten Commandments illustrate my point.

Exodus 20:8-11: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it."

The commandment to keep the Sabbath is based on God's prior model for us - 6 days work, 1 day rest - as narrated for us in Genesis 1. As well as in Exodus, the Bible refers to the early chapters of Genesis as factual, and Adam and Eve as literal people, in several other places. Here are a couple:

1 Chronicles 1:1-28 gives Abraham's genealogy, tracing the exact path from Adam. If Abraham was a real person, then surely so was Adam. Similarly, Luke 3:23-38 traces Jesus' genealogy all the way back to Adam. Clearly Luke treats Adam as real. In 1 Timothy 2:13-14, Paul's instruction that women not hold authority over men within the Church is predicated upon Adam and Eve, the order in which God created them, and that Eve was the one who was deceived but Adam knew what he was doing when he ate of the fruit. Clearly Paul is appealing to what he understands to be fact.

Falling from grace implies a flaw, a perfect being cannot fall from grace by definition.

Not at all. Lucifer was "... the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty... perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till iniquity was found in [him]..." (Ezekiel 28:12b, 15)

Besides, we define "good" by God - He is the source of all goodness, the ultimate measure by which we say something is or isn't good. You will agree that God Himself is perfect. The same Hebrew word for "good" in Genesis 1:31, used to describe the completed Creation, is used many times elsewhere in Scripture to refer to God Himself. For example:

Psalm 25:8: "Good and upright is the LORD; therefore He teaches sinners in the way."
Psalm 34:8: "Oh, taste and see that the LORD is good; blessed is the man who trusts in Him!"
Psalm 86:5: "For You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive, and abundant in mercy to all those who call upon You."
Psalm 100:5: "For the LORD is good; His mercy is everlasting, and His truth endures to all generations."

Our good God, the one who sets the standard for goodness, said Creation was "very good", so I see no Scriptural reason to believe it was anything other than perfect, sinless, and deathless, in accordance with His own nature. If your definition of "very good" includes millions of years of death, disease, and suffering, then I dread to think what you mean by "very bad"!

... this requires the interpretation that it's physical death that the Bible refers to.

Yes, because the language is referring to physical death. The context of Romans 5:12 makes that obvious.

Romans 5:6-12: "For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us... when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son... Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned..."

Are these all merely "spiritual death"?

What about the matter of my body that also belonged to other people during history, and will belong to other people's bodies in the future? What about proton decay? Physical bodies would be incomplete and eventually decay again.

1 Corinthians 15:35, 42-44, 52b-53: "But someone will say, “How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come?"... So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body... For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

Jesus' resurrection is the pattern for our resurrection, and we know from Scripture that His body was physical - it was able to eat, be touched and felt - and yet it was also able to appear and disappear at will, and enter locked rooms. Thus we know that our resurrection bodies will also be physical, and yet immortal and not bound to our present fallen existence. They will certainly not be subject to the present law of decay.

And plants don't die physically?

Biblically, plants aren't described as "living" in the same sense as animals and people are, and thus they don't "die" in the same sense. The creatures affected by death are what the Bible calls nephesh chayyah - "living creatures" (including animals, fish, and birds) and "living souls" (people). It is these for whom sin brought death and suffering. Plants don't suffer.

Moreover, many carnivorous species are completely incapable of living on a vegetarian diet. Their teeth and digestive tracts are unsuitable for plants. Think about spiders. Snakes. Any parasite. Sharks. What did they eat, or how did they become the way they are now?

Things changed dramatically as a result of the Fall. All of Creation "... was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." (Romans 8:20-21) We have had 6000 years of this curse, which has resulted in the widespread death and disease that we see today. Take cancer - which has been found in dinosaur bones - for example; do you really think it was part of the original Creation that God called "very good"? It is a result of the general decay in all Creation that resulted from the Fall.

So, with the introduction of sin we had the introduction of violence and death; man-to-man, man-to-beast, beast-to-beast. Animals that were originally vegetarian became meat-eaters.

The shape of an animal's teeth isn't a foolproof indicator of its diet. Giant pandas have teeth that are razor-sharp, but they eat bamboo. Even in recent history there have been examples of animals that have "bucked the trend" and resorted to a solely vegetarian diet. For example, the African lioness "Little Tyke" spurned all efforts to get her to eat any kind of meat or animal product all her life (see http://www.vegetarismus.ch/vegepet/tyke.htm). The spider Bagheera kiplingi is primarily vegetarian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagheera_kiplingi). So there's no reason not to believe that prior to the Fall all animals were herbivores.

Seriously though, it's a nice to remember, at the end of the day, after we're done beating up on one another, that us Christians are still brothers, no matter how much we may disagree on certain issues.

Agreed, but it is the truth that sets us free, not error. We must seek to believe the truth, as given to us in God's Word.

 

[Barbarian]

Our good God, the one who sets the standard for goodness, said Creation was "very good", so I see no Scriptural reason to believe it was anything other than perfect, sinless, and deathless,

The fact that He didn't say it was "perfect, sinless and deathless." "Very good" means none of those things. As you see, YE creationism (which was invented by the Seventh-Day Adventists in the last century) depends on making additions to the word of God.

And the "life ex nihilo" doctrine of YE creationism is directly refuted by God in Genesis. He says the earth brought forth living things.

You won't go to hell for being a YE creationist; God doesn't care if you accept the way He did it, or not. But if you take Scripture as it is, it would be better for you.

 

[inhopeofglory]

The fact that He didn't say it was "perfect, sinless and deathless." "Very good" means none of those things.

A perfect God does not call a pre-Fall, pre-Curse world "very good" unless it is very good. Millions of years of death, disease, and suffering is not "very good" by any definition. If death was introduced into the world through Adam's sin as per Romans 5:12, then that must mean that the pre-Fall Earth was both sinless and deathless.

As you see, YE creationism (which was invented by the Seventh-Day Adventists in the last century) depends on making additions to the word of God.

That's a very curious claim to make, considering the words of Jesus:

Mark 10:6: "But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female..."

Jesus clearly believed Genesis, that mankind was created at the beginning of Earth's timeline (not after billions of years at the end of a millions-plus years long cycle of continual death). As I've already pointed out, Scripture contains multiple references to the early chapters of Genesis as actual fact, with Adam and Eve as real people.

Here's another - the words of Jesus, in reference to Abel as a real, historical person. If Abel was real, then surely his parents were too...

Matthew 23:35: "... that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar."

And the "life ex nihilo" doctrine of YE creationism is directly refuted by God in Genesis. He says the earth brought forth living things.

Creationists don't believe that life was created ex-nihilo, but that the universe and this planet were. Living things were created ex materia (out of previously created material). However, in no way does this leave room for Evolution. Genesis is clear that living things were created according to their own kind - i.e. dogs, cats, bears. The kinds were created there and then - there was no gradual evolution from simple to complex organisms.

But if you take Scripture as it is, it would be better for you.

I agree! But Evolution is not "taking Scripture as it is".

 

[Barbarian]

Barbarian observes:
The fact that He didn't say it was "perfect, sinless and deathless." "Very good" means none of those things.

A perfect God does not call a pre-Fall, pre-Curse world "very good" unless it is very good. Millions of years of death, disease, and suffering is not "very good" by any definition. If death was introduced into the world through Adam's sin as per Romans 5:12, then that must mean that the pre-Fall Earth was both sinless and deathless.

I understand why you want to add this to Scripture. I still think it's a bad idea.

Barbarian observes:
As you see, YE creationism (which was invented by the Seventh-Day Adventists in the last century) depends on making additions to the word of God.

That's a very curious claim to make

It's quite true.

Unlike 19th-century creationists, who rejected Darwinian evolution but acknowledged that life on earth has spanned millions of years, today's creationists believe that God made woman and man in a single act of creation within the last 10,000 years. They draw inspiration for their beliefs from George McCready Price, a Seventh-day Adventist who in the 1920s pioneered "flood geology," which traces most fossils back to Noah's flood and its aftermath.
http://www.amazon.com/Creationists-Evol ... 0520083938

considering the words of Jesus:

Mark 10:6: "But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female..."

If you think that refers to the very beginning, then you have to reject God's word in Genesis. It explicitly describes what was there in the beginning, and neither male nor female were there. They came later. If you can believe God.

Genesis 1: 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Jesus clearly believed Genesis,

So do Christians. But most of us realize that the Universe is much older than the Adventists think.

that mankind was created at the beginning of Earth's timeline (not after billions of years at the end of a millions-plus years long cycle of continual death).

He said that? (Barbarian checks) Nope. Not in Scripture.

As I've already pointed out, Scripture contains multiple references to the early chapters of Genesis as actual fact, with Adam and Eve as real people.

You think allegory can't be about real people? Seriously?

Barbarian observes:
And the "life ex nihilo" doctrine of YE creationism is directly refuted by God in Genesis. He says the earth brought forth living things.

Creationists don't believe that life was created ex-nihilo,

Only YE creationists. Notice that the journal of the Institute for Creation Research is "Ex Nihilo."

However, in no way does this leave room for Evolution.

It's directly observed. Denial of this fact is a very recent invention, by rather unorthodox people. St. Augustine, revered as a doctor of the Church, and the inspiration for many Protestants, acknowledged that "beasts" developed from pre-existing creation.

Augustine, in his commentary on Genesis, has some sensible things to say about how to handle the issues of apparent conflict between the Bible and natural science. He also gives an extended discussion of the creation of the universe. Augustine is against the idea of a separate miraculous act of creation of each kind [or species], which is what you would get from reading Genesis literally.

Augustine saw this kind of literal creation as demeaning to the abilities of the Creator. Augustine insists that the universe is brought to be in a single act, and within that act, God places the seeds of all that will come laterâ€â€all living things in particular, including the human body. Interestingly, Augustine excludes the human soul, but apart from that, the seeds of all else in the universe are in the original act of creation. The seeds will come to maturity when the conditions of earth and water are right, which is an extraordinary claim to make because it is so close to fact. What he was saying, is that God brought the profusion of living things to Earth in a natural way over time, possibly over very long stretches of time. This is what evolution turned out to be. I’m not saying Augustine has a theory of evolution like Darwin’sâ€â€Augustine did not say that one species comes from anotherâ€â€but he had a gradualist account of origins within which evolution would later fit. My argument, and the argument of others before me, is that from the Augustinian standpoint, an evolutionary scheme of origins is to be expected.
Genesis is clear that living things were created according to their own kind - i.e. dogs, cats, bears. The kinds were created there and then - there was no gradual evolution from simple to complex organisms.
http://www.science-spirit.org/article_d ... cle_id=546

Barbarian observes:
But if you take Scripture as it is, it would be better for you.

I agree!

So why are you adding all that extra stuff?

But Evolution is not "taking Scripture as it is".

Neither are protons, or kangaroos. Not everything that's true is in the Bible.

 

[parousia70]

Before the Fall there were no carnivores.

So... the Venus Fly trap didn't catch it's first fly until AFTER the fall?

The Sea anenome didn't sting it's first fish until after the fall?

The Jellyfish?

The Spider caught , what,.... vegetables?... in it's web before the fall?

The shark ate..... hmmmm what did the shark eat?

Physical death, clearly existed before the fall and was not a result of the fall, however, for Humans, the fall elevated physical death into the barrier between man and God that only Christ could bridge.

Through Christ, Physical death has now been restored to it's original purpose.