The Evolution of Original Sin

[quote=“tom, post:3, topic:4439, full:true”]
Thank you for this Post – one I believe is at the heart of our faith and existence.

The creation story in Genesis 2-3 that includes an account of a human fall in the Garden of Eden doesn’t say anything about original sin.

With respect, I disagree completely. To me, Genesis 3:5 clearly spells out the nature of our original sin… “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God".

This is the first sin in scripture making it the Original Sin. And rather than being about a simple act of disobedience, it illustrates the very worst of all sins – the desire to be god-like, to have ‘our will be done’, etc. A quick scan of human culture shows that this sin is pandemic and has countless forms. One could argue that every form of sin is merely a variant of one kind or another of this Original Sin.[/quote]

May I haste to point out, nothing is said about “desire to be God-like” being sinful. In fact we are often told to “Be ye Holy, for I am Holy.” We are encouraged throughout two covenants to attempt to be more like God. For that reason, I do not see emulating God to be sinful. Nor do I see wanting to be “more God-like” to be a disappointment in God’s eyes.

Truth of the matter is a little more subtle, in that Genesis does not camp on the grounds of first sin. Paul says more about it in his letter to Timothy.

My personal observation is that Adam had already known the bachelor-lifestyle, and did NOT want to return thereunto. He understood God’s instruction to him, because he evidently passed it on to Eve. I say this because when Eve quoted the injunction to Satan, she added a phrase that did not come from God’s injunction to Adam.

So Adam saw Eve approach him with a fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, in her hand, and heard her words of offer, “Take and eat,” and his first response would be one of horror, in that he was very cognizant of God’s command to not eat thereof; Adam would remember his loneliness, which did not become evident to him until after God brought Eve into his life.

God’s company would have sufficed but only until Adam “knew Eve” as God had told him to. Adam did NOT want to give that up, so he joined Eve in her sin, possibly as an attempt at protecting her from her own folly, possibly simply not wanting to let her go alone into this
“Death” thing God had suggested. Having no experience about such things, he could only speculate, but he knew it did not sound like something good.

Anyway, whatever prompted Adam, he did not sin first; Eve did. So the doctrine of “original sin” is a mismatch from its inception. It says the man sinned first, due to forgetting that “Adam” was a name given to both Adam and Eve; “This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
2Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”(Gen 5:1-2)

And Paul reminds us of this schema as he relates to us - " And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."(I Tim 2:14) So that when reference is made to "sin entered by one Man Adam, it included Eve from Gen 5:2. That eliminates the oft quoted “contradiction” made by doubters as to the veracity of scripture.

[quote=“tom, post:3, topic:4439, full:true”]
And this is consistent with evolution if it marks the point in which an animal species evolved past mere survival to the ability to grasp the concept of a Creator. But it is we humans who have chosen to go the next step bringing sin into an otherwise perfect creation.[/quote]

Respectfully disagree, for the following reasons. There is nothing in Genesis, nor in the Historicity of Man to suggest the Genesis account is false. I realize there is a non-scriptural scientific account offered in understanding Man’s beginnings, but it is not offered in rebuttal to scripture, only as an alternative understanding.

Nothing in the record rebuts Genesis account. It only differs. I consider the sources.

As for the assessment that the creation was “perfect,” again I disagree. According to the Genesis account, "God looked on everything he had made and saw that it was “very good.”

“Very Good” does not mean “Perfect.” “Perfect” is a reference in scripture to “completeness.” And it was just started, not completed. We are told Christ was “Perfected” at his demise. “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; 9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;”(Hebrews 5:8-9)

[quote=“Henry, post:4, topic:4439, full:true”]
There are some groups of Christians that are open to discussion on this subject and others that are not. As a Southern Baptist, I say death was in the world for animals before the fall. Did not plants die that the animals ate? Human beings were the only ones who were promised the possibility of eternal life; however, they did not obtain it in the earthly paradise due to sin. [/quote]

Respectfully, may I suggest, while it may be correct that they did not “obtain eternal life” as that would require ascending into heaven, they certainly had access to it. Remember, Adam and Eve still had access to “eternal life” until they were exiled therefrom,

Genesis 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and <color=blue>take also of the tree of life, and eat, <color=red>and live for ever: 23 <color=blue>Therefore the LORD God <color=red>sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

[quote=“Henry, post:4, topic:4439, full:true”]
Therefore, humans remained physically mortal until the present. We receive spiritually eternal life when we accept Christ; however, we are also promised a resurrection of the body in some way. There are different interpretations on just how this will occur. But we now have the promise of immortality through Christ. Will there be a resurrection for animals? [/quote]

Ecclesiastes 3:21 Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?
Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

[quote=“Henry, post:4, topic:4439, full:true”]
Getting back to original sin, I believe the doctrine can stay as it is. Billy Graham, a fellow Baptist theologian who graduated with a BTh at Florida Bible Institute and a BA in Anthropology can accept a form of conservative theistic evolution, but he still takes Genesis and original sin seriously. I must agree with him. C.S. Lewis believed in a literal Adam and Eve and also that other human beings were created. It did not really change his feeling about original sin. I do like Dr. Lamoureux’s book on evolutionary creation, and I am reading it for the second time. However, I do feel he is more liberal than Billy and I are. God Bless. Charles Miller, BA, MAR PS: My MAR is the same thing as a Master of Religious Education.[/quote]

I disagree with the entire suggestion of the doctrine of original sin. It is one thing to tell us of the origin of sin, it is quite another to invent a doctrine that imputes the sins of one, upon an entire race, when scripture tells us otherwise.

Ezekiel 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.
20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
25 Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?
26 When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.
27 Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

Romans 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

We are only responsible for those sins for which we can be held accountable; for example, if we teach our children to lie or steal, we will be accountable for those events should they happen prior to the child’s maturity. And any sins we commit ourselves, we are accountable for. But Adam’s sin belongs to Adam and Eve’s belongs to her.

Do me a favor and get it. You will find it very illuminating.
Al Leo

Sounds like an interesting book … any comments about the main argument of the book?

The subtitle, “The Impact of Natural Selection on the Future of Humanity” gives some idea of the thrust of his argument, but it is not so much in the manner of a struggle “red in tooth and claw” type of selection. I think Roger @relates might find this viewpoint interesting. Edward O. Wilson wrote the Foreward. I am not comfortable with Ed’s world view, but I admit he is an effective writer. Naturally I was taken with de Duve’s statement that “the acquisition of language was a crucial step in homanization” and that it occurred as “the great breakthrough” or the “great leap forward”.
Al Leo

1 Like

Where can I find Billy Graham’s thoughts on conservative thiestic evolution?

@Nick_Allen

“The Bible is not a book of science. The Bible is a book of Redemption, and of course I accept the Creation story. I believe that God did create the universe. I believe that God created man, and whether it came by an evolutionary process and at a certain point He took this person or being and made him a living soul or not, does not change the fact that God did create man. … whichever way God did it makes no difference as to what man is and man’s relationship to God.” Billy Graham: Personal Thoughts of a Public Man, 1997. p. 72-74”

I suppose one might say that Billy Graham was “agnostic” about the Creationism…

2 Likes

I believe in a Local Eden. God created the world (and people) by thiestic evolution as described in Genesis 1, and then created Adam and the garden in Eden through special creation as described in Genesis 2. When Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, sin entered the garden for the first time. Sin had been alive and well outside the garden long before. What Adam and Eve did in the garden was to choose to be culpable for their actions, and they represented us when they did it in that each of us would make the same choice. This is God’s way of proving to us that he is not evil for creating us. Because we are not God, we are not perfect and therefore we will sin, and some of us will choose to reject God. Without the experiment of Adam and Eve, we could argue that God is the author of evil. Because of Adam and Eve, we can see that we are culpable. We can see that given the choice of living in a perfect garden, vs. being able to choose right from wrong for ourselves, we each would choose to have knowledge of good and evil. The result is that we require a world to live in that challenges us, and is difficult, and is filled with other people who have the freedom to make the wrong choices and hurt us. So, sin is just the necessary logical result of free will. Adam and Eve are the answer to the Problem of Pain. Jesus is the solution to the Problem of Pain.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.