Evolution does NOT preclude Christianity

Let's have a look at the two accounts of Genesis. Genesis 1:19-27 (King James Version): 19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. . . . 23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: . . . 27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Genesis 2:4-19 (King James Version): 4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, ... 7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. . . . 18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. In Genesis chapter 1, God created the animals BEFORE man and woman. In Genesis chapter 2, God created man (Adam) BEFORE the animals and THEN created the woman from the man. If we are to take this literally, than which did God create first, the animals or man? Also, consider Genesis 2:4. First it mentions the “generations” when the earth was created, this implies creation was LONGER than a literal week. THEN it mentions “the day that the Lord God made the earth,” this implies creation was SHORTER than a literal week. Tell me, which is it? A literal week? Longer? Shorter? If the Bible is taken literally, its report of Creation is completely contradictory. God could NOT have literally and physically created the single man BOTH before AND after he created the animals. God could NOT have physically and literally created the world in a single week AND a single day AND generations. A Christian believes that the whole Bible contains truth IN SOME FORM. The only way both the Creation accounts in Genesis could be true is if it is NOT TAKEN LITERALLY. If it is taken literally, ONE OR THE OTHER ACCOUNT IS BLATANT UNTRUTH. However, if we take the Creation accounts as metaphor, allegory, or just a simplification, these accounts in the Bible can still contain TRUTH. THEREFORE, WE CAN CONCLUDE THAT THE ACCOUNTS OF CREATION IN GENESIS CANNOT BE TAKEN LITERALLY FROM A CHRISTIAN PERSPECTIVE. As Christians, we MUST take these passages as metaphor, allegory, or a simplification of the events. Obviously, if a Christian does not need to take the Creation accounts in Genesis as literal truth of the origin of human life, this leaves the door wide open to what science concludes, EVOLUTION. Original Sin I addressed the issue of original sin in my last post, but I will cover it again in the form of a Q and A. Q: If the creation accounts in Genesis are not literal, does that mean the story of the Adam and Eve is not literal? A: Yes, very probably. The idea that the entire human species descended from 2 individuals (as recently as 10,000 years ago) is scientifically unsound. It is an impossibility considering human genetics. Q: Can original sin exist without a literal Adam and Eve? A: Why not, original sin is a human condition, why would it HAVE to be linked with a literal historic event (the fall)? Some denominations uphold that original sin is NOT dependent on Adam, but rather EACH individual person. The Methodist Church, founded by John Wesley, upholds Article VII in the Articles of Religion in the Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church: Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually.” Q: Isn't original sin central to Christianity? Doesn't Jesus' sacrifice rely on original sin? A: The doctrine of original sin was put together by Augustine in the 4th century, using the writings of Paul (Romans 5:12-21). The Catholic church and many protestant denominations do hold original sin to be Biblical. However, many Eastern churches and some protestant denomination have do not include original sin in their doctrine. Jesus does not speak of original sin. Therefore, the doctrine of original sin varies by the church, and it is NOT absolutely central to the Christian faith. The sacrifice of Jesus isn't just atonement for Adam's sin, but rather that of every individual person who has sinned (which is everyone). Conclusion Why doesn't evolution preclude Christianity? Here is a summary: It is UNDENIABLE that the Bible uses metaphor, there are verses concerning science the we KNOW aren't correct. The Bible is not meant as a technical science book. The Creation accounts in Genesis are conflicting. They conflict in both when man was created compared to animals AND how long creation took place. A Christian MUST take these passage as allegory or a simplification (rather than literally) if they ACCEPT THE BIBLE AS TRUTH. The concept of original sin is NOT undermined by a metaphorical interpretation in Genesis. Original sin is NOT dependent on the actions of Adam, but rather the actions of all human being individually. All have sinned. God gave us two revelations: the Bible and the physical Creation. If these two things conflict, there MUST be an error in interpretation. Since there is MASSIVE scientific evidence for evolution, we are likely MISINTERPRETING THE SCRIPTURE. With this in mind, the accounts in Genesis are likely parable. Perhaps it was a simple way to communicate the evolution of creation to the people of BC Israel. Perhaps “the fall” is the point at which the human species crossed the threshold of complexity to comprehend moral issues. With this, came evil. Of course, I can't say for sure. Anyway, if a Christian does actually believe in God, he will not be afraid to embrace the scientific truth of evolution. The direct work of God (the physical world) CANNOT conflict with the God's inspired message (the Bible). The problem occurs in the human interpretation. Because of the overwhelming evidence for evolution, and the unlikelihood of the literal 6-day creation, a Christian must conclude that GOD USED EVOLUTION TO CREATE ALL LIFE, INCLUDING HUMAN LIFE. "From religion comes a man's purpose; from science, his power to achieve it. Sometimes people ask if religion and science are not opposed to one another. They are: in the sense that the thumb and fingers of my hands are opposed to one another. It is an opposition by means of which anything can be grasped." --William H. Bragg - Awarded Nobel Prize in 1915. It has been a pleasure to talk about this with you. You've brought up some excellent points and questions. You have been quite patient with my long explanations and you are respectful to other viewpoints. Thank you. And thanks to everyone for reading!