I see where you are coming from, but the fact that there is a lot of yucky stuff in the world to come to terms with is not an exclusively EC problem. In the YEC model, the God of the Universe uncreated his creation by flooding the whole earth, violently killing EVERYTHING except a few lucky boat riders. Don’t even get me started on eternal conscious torment for the billions of people who die never hearing of Christ, just because a couple ate some forbidden fruit and broke the world, also willed by the God of the Universe. There is a reason “the problem of evil” is considered a problem when it comes to God-belief.
9 Likes
Romans 2:12-16 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have [h]the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.
One thing to consider also for those who never heard the gospel is that they will be judged by their hearts. Their conscience will testify that they truly did what they thought was best or if they willfully hardened their hearts against what they knew was wrong and pursued evil.
I do agree that how does evil play into Gods role is something every interpretation must wrestle with.
1 Like
@Christopher_Michael, I think your willingness to confront this head on speaks well of you and if it leads you to the kind of faith Christy exhibits won’t that be worth it? Eyes wide open must be the toughest way to faith but to my mind the only genuine sort.
5 Likes
Thank you Christy. I would love to understand more of the mechanics behind your view of who God is and on what foundation they are built on - it’s something I don’t really understand at the moment but you present a kind of confidence about them that is at least somewhat reassuring. Can I ask, is your view of God and truth built on the principle of what I’d call “generalised deductions” - eg the Bible shows us God is creator (but not how) so I believe we are created by him, the Bible shows us Jesus lives us and died for us - so Jesus is our saviour, supporter and friend. Is your interpretative method a bit like sorting out “this but is purely cultural context, chuck it, this bit is cultural context but it is saying this about God, keep the bit it says about God”?
If I understand where you are coming from correctly - you’re view of God might be described as ‘liberal’, in that it is not based on the deductions of the Bible stories per se but on something else?
Well, I’ll try but who God is and how we get at truth, that’s a pretty big topic. 
I went to a Christian college that required 12 hours of Bible credits for graduation. In one of the classes I still remember my professor saying that if you ask the question “Why is the Bible true?” your “because…” reveals what you are really basing your faith on. And the only appropriate foundation for faith is God, because everything else is fallible. So basically, he was saying that the “Bible is true” is an a priori that Christians accept based on personal relationship with the true God the Bible reveals. It’s a premise, not a conclusion. This really shook up my thinking, because I had lots of “becauses” and none of them were “I know God.”
I do think there is a cyclical relationship between God’s revelation of himself in the Bible and in Christ (recorded in the Bible) and knowing God. I don’t think we can fully and truly know God apart from the Bible, but at the same time, I don’t think mastering the content of God’s revelation in the Bible constitutes relating to God in love and dependence or equals faith. I don’t think faith is merely believing true propositions, I think it’s living your life a certain way because of your commitment to a relationship that entails a calling. And as you live out that faith in relationship, you become more experienced with and convinced of the truth of propositions about who God is and what he does. I don’t think you can live out your calling rightly without aligning with the Bible.
I have really benefited from some of the ideas that come out of narrative theology. I think the Bible tells a unified, overarching story that reveals God’s heart and mission. It reveals the God is the source and creator, that humanity is created to live in harmonious and just relationship with each other and God and the rest of creation, and all of our problems are related to a failure to fulfill our created purpose. It reveals God’s loving attempts throughout history to bring harmony and justice to the world through relationship with chosen people, with Israel, ultimately through Christ who makes possible the closest relationship with God ever, and through the Church entrusted to continue Christ’s work of reconciliation. The point of the story is that we learn who God is, how he relates to people, what he wants from us, and how to continue our role in his story in our context.
I don’t know, with a given Bible story, what percent is true fact and what percent is artistic license intended to communicate a true message. I believe the Bible tells a true history of real people, though the conventions and goals of history telling were so different from our own, if your goal is to sort out fact from fiction, doing so often misses the point of the story. Does it really matter if Jonah was literally and historically swallowed by a fish for three days? Is the point of that whole narrative to record a miracle, or is it something else? What was God trying to communicate by revealing this story to his people?
So, I guess when I approach Scripture, I’m never asking “What do I keep and what do I chuck?” I’m asking "What does this mean?" It’s a super hard question and nothing has shown more clearly how hard it is as when I work trying to explain passages in an entirely different non-western culture and try to help people figure out how to express what the Bible says in a totally different language that, for example, doesn’t have abstract nouns or prepositions. It really points out how much of our own understanding of what the Bible says is colored by our cultural frames and the translation choices that were made by others when it was translated to English.
I know Jesus is my Savior, supporter, and friend, not because the Bible tells me so, but because that is what I have experienced. Then the Bible explains it and validates it, and the rational, logical arguments about why the Bible is trustworthy ring true. Even when people first become convinced of the truth about Jesus primarily through Scripture, until they actually encounter God through Christ, it’s just knowledge not faith. I do believe there is such a thing as orthodoxy and that you cannot arrive at orthodox Christian faith without the Bible and the Spirit-led work of the Church throughout history maintaining doctrine and discipling people.
I don’t know how liberal that makes me. I don’t think anything goes or that my personal experience is all that matters or defines what is true. I just think personal experience is a valid way to access truth and the primary way we access truth about God, because God is personal and we know him in relationship.
9 Likes
The Bible documents the encounter of people who encountered the Living God and they try to explain that relationship with Him. The Bible is a mix of stories and accounts of people encountering this God, especially when we get to the NT with the God-man Jesus Christ and how people related to Him back then and how we can relate to Him now. I agree with you in how the Bible is historical but not “historical” as in now YEC or evangelical-fundamentalist’s Christians claim it as “historical” but its historical in that is has historical people have encounters with God and they try and make sense of it.
3 Likes
Yeah - I’m not trying to feign certainty about how resurrection happens. Which also means that I don’t with any certainty exclude anything either. After all, if there is to be a new heaven and a new earth, that sounds to me like more than just a few resuscitated human bodies. If the lion and the lamb are to play together … obvious imagery as that may be, I think the case can strongly be made that God cares for all His creatures, in their own right, and not just as fodder to get to some evolutionary summit (“…why us, of course”, we conclude without any hint of modesty). And yes - while the biblical case can be made for our special role distinguished from all the other animals, it seems to me a petty hubris to insist that God did nothing but twiddle His thumbs in boredom for several billion years before we came along.
1 Like
Thank you for so openly sharing Christy, it helps hearing others’ experiences. I’ll reflect more on what you’ve said overtime but appreciate you explaining it. For me personally, I am really trying to weigh up and balance the sense of personal faith and belief with just how much I’m now finding it hard to honestly rely on certain aspects of scripture. If Genesis 1 and 2 are lose parables and the Exodus stories as described most certainly did not happen - that’s real hard for me. I have a ‘peace within’ when I pray sure - but then so do Muslims and so do people who meditate etc, that sense of inner peace might be more about some sense of equilibrium of being in control, being centred, being okay that is more universal than Christian specific? I don’t know but I suspect it might be. I’m a bit lost in it all at the moment - feeling “held” I guess but it’s hard. That’s why I wanted to ask about your experience and say of understanding. I think hearing more people’s stories will help - I did start reading BioLogos’ new book ‘Why I changed my mind on evolution’ but haven’t yet come across people grappling with some of the issues I’ve raised in this thread. Anyway, thanks again - nice to have people such as yourself to help people like me through times like this
3 Likes
Interesting that we are simultaneously the summit and also the only creature expelled from the garden due to a fallen nature. So is a fallen nature necessary for becoming God’s image bearers? These are potent metaphors whatever else they may be.
To whom much is given, much is expected. Potent metaphors indeed!
[…and I would argue - scripturally at least - that the gift of ‘image’ preceded and should be considered the more primal ground of our being than our falleness. With all due respect to Calvin, Satan was never granted the authority to revoke God’s “and it was very good.”]
1 Like
I was actually thinking that the fallenness which makes us unable to simply act on instinct like all the other denizens of the garden is precisely what it is to be an image bearer. “Fallen” is in relation to fitness to abide in the garden. “Summit” is in relation to having both the capacity and responsibility to act freely* either in accord with conscience or against it.
*Probably should note that even we who have free will have more or less of it in some circumstances than in others. We’re not free to will ourselves to be stronger than we are, but nothing prevents us from trying.
3 Likes
I like where your thoughts went there, Mark. Capacity, and thus responsibility to occasionally - perhaps regularly - rise above our instincts? Yes.
And yet all the other animals, even if governed only by instinct - still are called ‘good’ by God. Though I know a vet who, I think, bristles at the suggestion that other animals could never rise above instinct. And I like the way she thinks. I should probably try to put that human conceit behind me as well.
3 Likes
Hi Christopher,
Thanks for initiating this interesting thread! What I don’t quite understand about your quandary is this: death and suffering are real regardless of whether ‘God uses evolution.’
Why does evolution make it more of a problem? An all-loving, omnipotent God allowing death and suffering is difficult to reconcile - granted. But why more so if life evolves? The baby monkey in your example dies and suffers in a YEC context too.
I don’t see how evolution ‘profits’ from suffering - as I understand it, evolution is less survival-of-the-fittest, and more life adapting to its changing environment. It seems to me that death is part of existence, and suffering is a problem regardless of one’s views on creation and/or evolution.
As an aside - Big Pete Enns fan here, I hope you enjoy the rest of the book 
2 Likes
Thank you Stacey, I’m glad people are finding this thread interesting.
I guess my point this: the standard teaching of the Bible as I understood by most people and certainly as I had been taught - is that God is not the author of death, the presence of sin let it in and as Hebrews says, it is Satan who has the ‘power’ of death. Sin and therefore death and suffering in general are the result of ‘sin coming into the world and death through sin’ to paraphrase Romans. I’ve always thought the presence of highly sophisticated poison systems etc in animals would mean they evolved rather than quite suddenly developed these systems after the fall due to the powerful force of death and sin, I mean I suppose to think that is ridiculous but I held a lot of cognitive distance about it. I’m now processing I suppose that death - in all its horror (at times at least) - was around before and that this belief is a myth and that therefore God himself is the soul behind constant, virtually endless, virtually meaningless death and suffering as outlined in my story of the two creatures who had to endure a bitterly cold night in a forest. The message as spoken by Evolution to the creature that died in that scenario is indeed sponsored by the God of the universe. It’s a hard pill to swallow and really does have big implications - I think - about what God is like.
@Christopher_Michael I’m not sure if @Christy response has been discussed at length yet, but she has a valid point that often us in the 21st century forget when we ask these sorts of questions.
In terms of Biblical interpretation, what my wife and I and local Christian friends have as a position is the following:
The Bible is a product of human minds that were exposing and rejecting the cultural ideas and practices of their time (even criticising the nation of Israel and Judea); the Biblical authors and people studying the scriptures over time during their development were developing an alternative worldview that were formed under what they believe to be the inspiration of YHWH, the creator of the universe and the earth and everything in it.
Thus, the Biblical authors were not writing and explaining ideas to scientists today in the 21st century, they were writing and explaining ideas to their contemporaries over a thousand years ago who have no concept of what we know today. Hence, it is not practical to ask questions of Evolution (or any other scientific theory for that matter) of the text. Rather, a more practical approach would be how does the principles of Evolution (or other scientific theory) compare to Moses’ ideas on creation presented in Genesis 1 and 2.
In Genesis 1, we are presented with categories of created things, this is congruent with a certain taxonomy and classification of species (and sub-species), but they are not ranked in a hierarchal structure like in Evolution. This is because the assumption that species evolve from other species is rejected: this is the main critique of Evolution today and proponents of Evolution are still trying to find the “missing links” to make the assumption plausible. Here is a summary of this concept: A Study of Hebrew Words in the Creation Record
Moses was merely observing (like Darwin) the flora and fauna of his day and making a conclusion. A conclusion that is still valid as a world view (I.e. not falsifiable) today. Indeed, many scientists are conducting research and developing alternative theories to Evolution (some of them aren’t even Christians) to offer better answers to why we haven’t been able to find these “missing links”.
I would agree with what Evolution theory presents about “variation” and “adaptation” this is evident in the short timescales that modern science can observe, and still congruent with Moses’ Biblical worldview. But, we have to highlight that what Evolution theory perceives as “natural selection” and “competition” is not of God, it is a result of the sin of the human person as Paul writes to the Romans in Chapter 8 (I think this was mentioned previously in this thread).
Moses makes the claim in the early chapters of Genesis that God originally gave vegetation as food for all living creatures; hence, there was no need to kill one another for food. He then subsequently through the next half of the book writes the narrative about how the human person decided to make up their own rules, thus introducing (not from God but from thinking they could decide what was right and wrong) competition and murder (refer to Cain and Abel), which subsequently causes scarcity and early unjust economics. God then sends the flood, which wipes out all vegetation in the land as punishment of the evil of the human person, and hence out of compassion allowed them to eat meat and implicitly other animals to eat each other for food, due to the scarcity of vegetation at that time period. This is probably what triggered what we as 21st century observers perceive to be the cruel ways life kills each other (either defensively or offensively).
So, the Biblical worldview is not that YHWH is the God of Death (like for example in Hinduism) or some kind of grim reaper choosing who to kill and who not to kill, but rather humanity is the cause of death in the world. Remember the Biblical worldview is that God separated the human person from the rest of creation as the “ruler” of the earth, but still beneath God (as we are only an image or resemblance of God, not God ourselves). We have no sovereignty (even if we, or governments, or other authorities say we do - this is only granted by God and can be taken away, our world leaders past, present and future will be judged according to their actions); we were meant to follow the instruction of YHWH to multiply and increase, and be stewards (I.e. caretaker on behalf of God) of the rest of creation. When Adam and Eve, and Cain (and his descendants) claimed sovereignty and decided what was right and wrong, they stuffed up the natural order of things and introduced scarcity, natural selection, competition - all these things results in death.
From the Jews (with traditions going back hundreds of years) that I have spoken with locally, they mentioned that Jews (at least from the Sephardic tradition) never believed God to be the bringer of death, this is not how they interpreted (or translated) the scriptures. They said, Jesus and other Jews during that time, would have had the same belief: God is the creator of life, and not the bringer of death, death was introduced by the human person because they disobeyed God and decided for themselves what was good and evil (I.e. right and wrong). Neither is Satan the personification of death (like in Greek/Roman concept of Hades/Pluto); Adam and Eve had a choice whether to follow Satan’s instructions or God; hence, it was preventable - they were not possessed by Satan (or some death god) or helpless to stop death; they could have prevented death, but chose not to and hence are liable for death in the world (just like every time we sin today we perpetuate death, even if we don’t realise the implications of our sin in the grand scheme of things - this was a humbling revelation for me personally).
We as Christians have chance to be a part of reconciliation and restoration in this world, by acting as agents of God to repair it. The way we can prevent death is to expose and challenge the bringers of death (e.g. polluters of the planet, unethical corporations, dictators, armies, crime syndicates, etc.) and coming up and implementing innovative ways to bring back life and healing to our world. That is why Paul writes in Romans 8 that the world is waiting for “the children of God to reveal themselves” because when we do, we can work together in partnership with God to conquer death, and work towards the vision Isaiah had that is written in Isaiah 11 and the author of Revelation expands the vision in Revelation 21, where there is no death and all creatures live in harmony with one another, in peace for eternity.
This is the hopeful message passed down from generation to generation, which is unfortunately not widely spread in the 21st century church. In my opinion, deliberately by the atheist who like the fact that Evolution theory is amoral, probably why most historical atheists like Stalin and Hitler used evolution to promote, justify and implement the eugenic and genocidal practices, and unfortunately led many Christians astray by accepting murder. Again, who is the author of death in these situations, the human person or God?
2 Likes
Christopher - you can include others’ quotes in your own posts by simply highlighting the text of interest in their post, and then clicking on the grey ‘quote’ box that immediately pops up. This will insert it into any response you already have open, or it will automatically start a response for you if you haven’t started it already. I did that with a quote of yours I wish to respond to below. But before getting to that … I’ll also mention you can also edit your own posts by clicking the grey pencil at the bottom of that post. (I believe in your very last sentence in the post above, you probably meant “It’s a hard pill to swallow…” rather than a hard pull.)
I’m increasingly persuaded that the Bible is a document that wrestles with itself. (okay - I know it’s really more of a library - but set that aside for the moment) I’m a Pete Enns fan too, but I’ve been getting this from other sources as well. So while we can find some texts that suggest that this world is under the dominion of Satan (such as the temptation narrative where Satan claims local authority and Christ doesn’t correct him, or take that opportunity to deny that), there are nonetheless plenty more texts (old and new testament) that suggest there are no “island refuges” where one could escape God’s sovereignty. So from the get-go, we have a text that confounds those who want to use it for gathering truth-propositions on everything. [well, is God in charge? or isn’t He? It can’t be both - law of excluded middle and all.] Yes, I know that there are many who pride themselves on “decoding” all of scriptures so that all tensions are resolved and dismissed to their satisfaction, and on their own terms. For those of us who are interested in letting scriptures dictate the terms instead, there is suddenly opened up a whole new depth and texture to explore - letting those words interrogate us rather than we always interrogating it.
All that is to say, I’m far from convinced that Satan is the author of death, or even that physical death was a novelty introduced into the universe by our sin. While there are passages that do make such attributions (the text never lets us rest!), there are plenty more testimonies from both God’s word and works that persuade me that God’s creation isn’t so easily overpowered and remade by us, much less by our shortcomings. There is a stronger theme, I think, of all things being created good, and of evil being incapable of creating anything at all - but only perverting the pre-existing good. While I can’t say for sure what “good death” in an unfallen world would even look like, I’m nonetheless convinced physical death is part of the fabric of the good creation and it was then turned into an enemy with a sting by our sin.
5 Likes
@Christopher_Michael
Hi Christopher,
Thank you for sharing your questions with us. In case it helps you to know my background: I was raised without any religion, but was born again at the age of 22, after becoming a biologist. As a scientist coming to faith, it helped me to think about God using evolution as a mechanism to bring abundant life into the world. Its amazing to think how God could guide evolution to fill the earth with such diverse, beautiful and amazing life in all different forms. I like watching nature shows where they show life even in the depths of the oceans, and in the freezing climates of the arctic, and in acidic (what we would think of as being toxic) environments like hot springs. Life fills every corner of the earth. and Life comes in so many diverse forms.
Thus, I never struggled, as you did with the idea of evolution being the cause of suffering, instead of original sin. But that’s probably just because the thought didn’t come into my mind. Reading your questions helps me understand how difficult those questions are. Of course none of us have complete and satisfying answers, but you will probably find a number of helpful ways to think about it and come to terms with it.
I agree with what @Christy said about how we hold onto our faith, not by resolving all of our questions 100%. Instead we are drawn to faith because of our personal relationship with Jesus and seeing how the truths of the Bible, the reality of our sin, and the power of the Cross for our salvation ring to be empirically true in the lived experiences in our lives.
I also like where Mervin is going with this:
As I was reading this thread, I was also wondering if it would be helpful for us to ask: Why do we as parents bring children into this world, even though we know that we cannot shield them from suffering and death? We still find immense joy in our lives with our friends and families in spite of the struggles we face. There is beauty in those relationships. God gave us all of those good things, and He also wants to be in relationship with us, which is incredible to think about. And in the end, God will rise above and conquer suffering and death - the Bible promises us that and our faith helps us know it to be true.
Once again, I hear the struggle you have and relate to the difficulty of your questions. I think God will reward this wrestling you are doing with Him now, which will result in a richer understanding and deeper relationship with Him.
6 Likes
Good question to think about. Goes a little toward the point @jpm brought up about the question of why a pathway through death. Though death itself develops nothing new, without it there’d be little opportunity for new life and new gene combinations.
As human parents are at least willing to stand with their children to face the challenges, perhaps that is also what God offers? Everyone assumes God can do anything whatsoever but why would that be. Isn’t it more likely that we just are not privy to the considerations which shape His choices? Perhaps He can no more genie his tough choices away than we can.
1 Like
But if you accept the account of natural history that science provides, then competition and natural selection was at work for billions of years before humans arrived on the scene to sin. And there are piles of evidence that carnivores existed long before humans and no evidence that at some point in time sin caused herbivores to magically transform into carnivores. There are fossils of ancient animals eating prey.
In the story God took his Garden inhabitants for a tour and said, “Look at this awesome place. All this lush produce is free for the taking.” I read it as a statement of abundance and protection from a caring Provider, not a prohibition against any creature eating meat. It’s a direct contrast with the post-Garden cursed existence where produce is only available by the sweat of human’s brow, working thorny ground. The protection and abundance has been removed. That is the intended contrast in view, I believe, not meat vs. vegetables. Otherwise in one generation, Abel becomes a herdsman (humans generally keep herds for meat, not just clothing or milk), and God is more pleased with his offering of an animal than Cain’s offering of vegetables. That is hard to reconcile with the idea that meat-eating is somehow tied to sin, and the very idea that a farmer would engage in animal husbandry is essentially due to sinful depravity.
I don’t think this is necessarily wrong in terms of how the Bible presents the story, but I don’t think the “death” the Bible attributes to human sin is all physical and animal death in the world. It’s human death, and often, spiritual death that is in view. There are passages in Job (38: 39-41) and Psalms (34:10), 104:21 where the Creator claims he provides for his apex predators, which implies they are doing exactly what they are created to do when they eat meat.
4 Likes
Thank you @andrewt316. There is a great deal of richness in all these posts that is helping me - kind of feels like being in some kind of healing room where my ‘open wounds’ (for definite lack of a better analogy) are being restored, the pain and ache of them easing. Your contributions and explanation is indeed the desire of our human hearts - to embrace that God is through and through the author of life and the antithesis of death. That indeed is such an overarching theme through the entire Bible … and her evolution as I’ve done my best to outline is such a brutal system … and by deduction of it being the actual system by which we came as far as we know and science clearly suggests, is the system God used. So there appears to be an inherent and deeply perplexing contradiction or quandary in that. I like what @Mervin_Bitikofer outlined as apparent inherit contradictions - better outlined as ‘tensions’ - there are in the Bible (I corrected that mistake too, thanks for the point out). I suppose this is another such tension I am trying to wrestle with, keeping the example of all the baby monkeys and dead frozen animals I have mentioned already. They suffered, immensely, brutally - with no protector, no guardian. For them is no resurrection, no meaning, no nothing. Just a terrible end and quite likely a hard life of suffering prior. All this prior to whoever or whatever Adam was. That’s something we can’t just ignore if we believe it. It’s a horrid picture and look though I may (and I’m repeating myself a little here I suppose), the tsunami of suffering in many ways drowns out the beauty. A serial killer may do beautiful things … but everything about them in so many ways is deeply tainted by the aspect of their personality that kills. It’s wicked. In a similar way, e system of evolution is so ugly - it having such a deep, dark red streak of pin and death running down its middle - even if also filled in its other parts with beautiful bright colours. Just like how the Bible personified human kingdom systems as beasts in the book of Daniel and Revelation etc - if we personify the system that is evolution… it is incredibly beautiful and complex - amazing to behold but also the stuff of anyone’s very worst nightmares.
I remain puzzled and I pray - God, please help me find the answers.
I’m loving reading everyone’s contributions - thank you