GENESIS CONTEMPLATION I
Adam & Sin vs. Evolution & Evil
In the beginning God made the first human being, Adam. Adam is the Father of mankind/humankind (Gen. 2:7). We all come from Adam’s sperm/seed. When Adam disobeyed God’s command (Gen. 2:16-17; 3:1-11), that act was what produced sin—the missing the mark of God, the erring from God’s way, disobedience to God—and death*, and because we all come from Adam we therefore are all born into sin and death (Rom. 5:12). Thus all the evil and chaos and bad crap in life, from Adam to the last day, is due to the sin and death consequence from Adam’s act of disobedience.
Those who don’t believe that God created everything as it states in the Genesis account reject this origin of the problem of evil and so on as insufficient or unscientific. Ok, well let’s look at the only other theory for human life in this light then, evolution. The theory of evolution says, loosely, that we as humans evolved from other things, etc, etc. If we trace the “other things” back to its first beginning, some type of unformed substance, what eventually came from this—according to natural selection—survived by killing off (or outliving) its opposition or hindrance to survive (that’s an act of self-centeredness and violence). And so on the evolutionary process goes. From this we see, even the “in the beginning” of evolution an act we now consider an evil—violence—and a problem—selfishness—is integrated in the very fabric of this process. Evolution is secular science’s equivalent to Adam as the origin of humankind, and so we can deduce the same conclusion from Adam for evolution: Because we all come from the evolutionary process we therefore are all born into the evil produced from evolution. Thus all the evil and chaos and bad crap in life, from the beginning to the end, is due to the beginning acts of the evolutionary process (self-centeredness and violence).
We can see regardless to which view one holds, the problem of sin/evil originates at the very beginning. The difference is, and it’s a big one, every ideology (aside from one) has no, nada, none, zero, zilch of an adequate answer or solution to this problem, except death—which without a 100% certainty there is no afterlife “death” may not even be an answer/solution but a greater eternal problem. However, I can say this with all the confidence in the world, one will find the only adequate answer to this problem in Jesus Christ*, if one looks without prejudice or discrimination to the good reasons and ample evidence that is available on His behalf.
A Talking Snake?
The Bible reports a cunning serpent as the culprit behind the deception of Eve which led ultimately to Adam’s disobedience to God. People who don’t accept the Bible’s account of the beginning think it is preposterous to believe in a talking snake, though it’s easy for them to believe that we evolved from this glob thing, and then another thing, and then more things, and then finally monkeys (so it is said and widely accepted in the secular scientific community but still debated). Yet it’s preposterous to believe in a talking snake, hmm. For all we know, especially because empirical science* cannot pose absolutes only probabilities, natural selection could very well have us evolving from snakes and we can talk, hmm. Doesn’t sound so preposterous after all now does it?
Evolution doesn’t explain away God as so many atheists suggest. In certain cases the theory of the evolutionary process actually shows plausibility for God’s existence and the trustworthiness of the Bible. For example, Genesis 3:14—written thousands of years before the theory of evolution—records, “So the LORD God said to the serpent, “On your belly you shall go…all the days of your life.”” Evolution shows this as probable for the ancestry of snakes. So whether true or not, (though I believe Darwin’s theory of evolution is false and the Creation account in Genesis to be true), evolution does not necessarily explain away God or the credibility of the Bible. People simply choose to use evolution as a scapegoat for not accepting the Covenant God’s existence, to which the Bible attests (Rom. 1:20-21).
Take away whatever you can from these two topics. I do hope this was a help in some way. It was a simple contemplation of mine as I journey again through the book of Genesis. I will post more as they come along during this journey of mine.
*2. Jesus the Son of God and God the Son distinguishes Himself from the “Jesus” of Jehovah Witness, Mormonism, Christian Science, the Jesus Seminar, or any other beliefs spun off of the historic Jesus of Nazareth found in the Holy Bible.
*3. Science generally and largely makes empirical claims and deals with empirical issues, meaning there claims and issues can be solved by experience, either directly by observation or indirectly by experimentation. Empirical science is obviously verifiable, but an unspoken fact of empirical science is that it is also falsifiable (capable of being disproved). This is why empirical science can never deduce (assume, conclude) absolutes only strong or weak probabilities (e.g. theories, hypothesis).
Adam & Sin vs. Evolution & Evil
In the beginning God made the first human being, Adam. Adam is the Father of mankind/humankind (Gen. 2:7). We all come from Adam’s sperm/seed. When Adam disobeyed God’s command (Gen. 2:16-17; 3:1-11), that act was what produced sin—the missing the mark of God, the erring from God’s way, disobedience to God—and death*, and because we all come from Adam we therefore are all born into sin and death (Rom. 5:12). Thus all the evil and chaos and bad crap in life, from Adam to the last day, is due to the sin and death consequence from Adam’s act of disobedience.
Those who don’t believe that God created everything as it states in the Genesis account reject this origin of the problem of evil and so on as insufficient or unscientific. Ok, well let’s look at the only other theory for human life in this light then, evolution. The theory of evolution says, loosely, that we as humans evolved from other things, etc, etc. If we trace the “other things” back to its first beginning, some type of unformed substance, what eventually came from this—according to natural selection—survived by killing off (or outliving) its opposition or hindrance to survive (that’s an act of self-centeredness and violence). And so on the evolutionary process goes. From this we see, even the “in the beginning” of evolution an act we now consider an evil—violence—and a problem—selfishness—is integrated in the very fabric of this process. Evolution is secular science’s equivalent to Adam as the origin of humankind, and so we can deduce the same conclusion from Adam for evolution: Because we all come from the evolutionary process we therefore are all born into the evil produced from evolution. Thus all the evil and chaos and bad crap in life, from the beginning to the end, is due to the beginning acts of the evolutionary process (self-centeredness and violence).
We can see regardless to which view one holds, the problem of sin/evil originates at the very beginning. The difference is, and it’s a big one, every ideology (aside from one) has no, nada, none, zero, zilch of an adequate answer or solution to this problem, except death—which without a 100% certainty there is no afterlife “death” may not even be an answer/solution but a greater eternal problem. However, I can say this with all the confidence in the world, one will find the only adequate answer to this problem in Jesus Christ*, if one looks without prejudice or discrimination to the good reasons and ample evidence that is available on His behalf.
A Talking Snake?
The Bible reports a cunning serpent as the culprit behind the deception of Eve which led ultimately to Adam’s disobedience to God. People who don’t accept the Bible’s account of the beginning think it is preposterous to believe in a talking snake, though it’s easy for them to believe that we evolved from this glob thing, and then another thing, and then more things, and then finally monkeys (so it is said and widely accepted in the secular scientific community but still debated). Yet it’s preposterous to believe in a talking snake, hmm. For all we know, especially because empirical science* cannot pose absolutes only probabilities, natural selection could very well have us evolving from snakes and we can talk, hmm. Doesn’t sound so preposterous after all now does it?
Evolution doesn’t explain away God as so many atheists suggest. In certain cases the theory of the evolutionary process actually shows plausibility for God’s existence and the trustworthiness of the Bible. For example, Genesis 3:14—written thousands of years before the theory of evolution—records, “So the LORD God said to the serpent, “On your belly you shall go…all the days of your life.”” Evolution shows this as probable for the ancestry of snakes. So whether true or not, (though I believe Darwin’s theory of evolution is false and the Creation account in Genesis to be true), evolution does not necessarily explain away God or the credibility of the Bible. People simply choose to use evolution as a scapegoat for not accepting the Covenant God’s existence, to which the Bible attests (Rom. 1:20-21).
Take away whatever you can from these two topics. I do hope this was a help in some way. It was a simple contemplation of mine as I journey again through the book of Genesis. I will post more as they come along during this journey of mine.
_________________________________________________________________
*1. There are 4 parts to the death consequence if Adam disobeyed God’s command. The first part of death is death by separation from God (Gen. 2:23-24). The second part of death is death by violence (Gen. 4:8). The third part of death is death by the natural (Gen. 5:5). The fourth part of death is death by destruction (Gen. 6:7).*2. Jesus the Son of God and God the Son distinguishes Himself from the “Jesus” of Jehovah Witness, Mormonism, Christian Science, the Jesus Seminar, or any other beliefs spun off of the historic Jesus of Nazareth found in the Holy Bible.
*3. Science generally and largely makes empirical claims and deals with empirical issues, meaning there claims and issues can be solved by experience, either directly by observation or indirectly by experimentation. Empirical science is obviously verifiable, but an unspoken fact of empirical science is that it is also falsifiable (capable of being disproved). This is why empirical science can never deduce (assume, conclude) absolutes only strong or weak probabilities (e.g. theories, hypothesis).
2009
