www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Adam and Eve

Dear Friends,

This is something I've been ruminating on for a while. All the Apostolic Churches clearly teach about Adam and Eve, their sin, and the inheritance/consequence of that sin for their descendants, our human race.

But how do we square evolution with knowing who Adam and Even were? The fact that evolution is true (vestigial organs in organisms, etc. etc.) is not really debatable. The fact that we humans have evolved from something prior is more debatable, but not really.

Let's be honest: not many of us believe that the earth was created 6,000 some-odd years ago and that a man named Adam and a woman named Eve appeared without any ancestors to speak of. Neither are Catholics required to believe literally in the Creation Story or that Earth is 6,000 years old.

But, as far as I know, we are required to believe that Adam and Eve (whoever they were and however they came about) existed, and that we inherited the consequences of Original Sin from them.

So, my question is: how does the concept of evolution, which seems not to pinpoint the first instance of "humanity" or the human condition or the soul or whatever you want to call it, jive with the belief that our ancestors sinned and introduced its consequences to all their progeny?

I'm not explaining the difficulty I see arising very well, but does this seem troublesome to anyone else? Maybe I'm missing something obvious.

Alexis

Alexis:

There is nothing in the Genesis story that is incompatible with evolution. Genesis is an attempt to show the origins of humanity in a world that did not have the fossil evidence that has appeared in our day.

So how do we reconcile this?

The story of Genesis is meant to show that we were created by a Divine Being, a Divine Being Who has kept in contact with His creation and finally comes into it. It is a story about who we are as human beings: created in the image and likeness of the Divine Being Who created everything that we can see and Who is totally Other to His creation. Genesis speaks of our having been given free will--the ability to make our own choices, both good and bad and living with the consequences of those choices. The story of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil I've already commented on here before, though the thread seems to be lost. It shows that we lost the special relationship with our Creator that we were menat to have as human beings.

We understand that we are broken--it seems to be almost intuitive. We understand that no matter how hard we try we cannot control our environment or even our lives. We're here today and gone tomorrow. Somehow the earliest people came up with explanations that helped them cope with what seemed to be a totally random, totally hostile, and sometimes, totally irrational world in which they lived. Something like the bumper sticker that says, "He who dies with the most toys still loses."

The two seemingly contradictory versions become a problem if and only if we treat Genesis in a Protestant fundamentalist fashion--that is, that every word in Genesis is historical fact and not a literary form. We have to see our Scripture as a living thing through which the Holy Spirit leads us into all Truth. Remember that Christ Himself told us that He is Truth; Truth is a Person: it's literally none other than Him. That our God could create us by means of some wonderful evolution of His creation should not threaten any true believer. It just demonstrates that he is so far more intelligent than we can even imagine and that He has created it all by Himself out of nothing simply by willing it to be. Examine the largest thing that you can imagine and then get down to those levels below atoms and see the vast intelligence that has created all this "order" and not left it "chaos" and you begin to understand we aren't dealing with one of the gods of ancient mythology. We've dealing with the genuine Article. All this says to me, "Stand up, take notice, and pay close attention." The Word is alive and well. The Scripture is a living thing--the icon of the Living Logos Who came here to re-establish a way for us to again become what we were intended to be: sons of God, heirs of the Kingdom, whole again. I read a anecdote once about a missionary who was trying to convince a native about the wonderful news of Christianity. But the man thought it was too good to be true. So they walked along together until they came to a huge ant hill. The missionary asked the man to imagine himself to be God. And then he asked the native how he would tell the ants that he loved them if he were God. The light went on and the native replied, "I'd become an ant."

What separates us from the slime and the creatures that are less than us is this: memory, intelligence, and will. These three are the things that make up the soul and that will last forever. There was a long dissertation on EWTN some years back when I lay flat on my back in therapy, but the preacher demonstrated quite well how these three will last into eternity and they are three things that other creatures do not have in the sam way and degree that we do. (Intelligence in animals he showed was not the same as human intelligence, but rather was of a more primitive type.)

So the point here is that Genesis does not necessarily oppose evolution. It is another way of examining this vast, complex creation we are part of. Evolution, however, fails to tell us the reason for it all. It just tells us what has been. It still takes a leap of faith to understand what will be and why it is.

In Christ,

BOB

Evolution is constantly changing it's findings, so I prefer the teachings of the Fathers over the predominantly atheistic evolutionists who are pushing an anti-Christian agenda. If all things should be considered by the Scientific community, than surely the findings of Hindu archeologist Michael Cremo, author of Forbidden Archeology should be included.

At one time there were no humans. And then, there were. There was a first instance of humanity. Created by God in His image and likeness, these humans were free from corruption. When tempted, they freely chose to disobey God, for which He justly punished them and their descendents.

Bob,

Thank you for your clarification. It does make a lot of sense, but I've never, ever been prone to interpret Genesis literally. The real crux of the question is, I think, what John is pointing to.

My real question has to do with how did Original Sin/the consequences of our fallen humanity/whatever (I'm not looking to get into an East vs. West debate here) come to be? Were there, or were there not, two historical persons who were the first humans who introduced it by their disobedience of God? If not, how do we explain the human condition under Original Sin?

I suppose even in evolution there were at one instance non-humans, as John says, and then the next generation were what we could pass off as humans, with a soul, etc. This would mean that the first humans' parents were humanoid, but not human, not possessing immortal souls and will etc. like their children. So did these first humans disobey God and bring Original Sin into existence?

I am really having the hardest time formulating my questions, but it has something to do with not understanding how Original Sin came about when we consider evolution, which despite Lawrence's disagreement, I certainly believe in (and am allowed to as a Catholic).

Alexis

The theory of evolution remains a theory.

If the theory of evolution were in fact a law, then we would have to see apes evolving into men, and they are not, and we have no clear evidence of this for thousands of years.

The only "skeletal remains" recently found in Africa are supposedly hundreds of thousands of years old. Yet even these remains are distinctly not ape like, but uniquely human.

Where are those missing links? Yes, we had some apparent missing links found in skulls until the fraud was discovered. And text books on evolution do not mention those frauds but continue the myth. Yes, the wonderful French Jesuit Teillhard de Chardin manufactured at least two skulls which fooled scientists for many years until his crime was uncovered but barely disclosed to the public.

Let's just say for arguments sake that evolution is in fact the case. Then what?

Alexis

Then we might as well say that God is not the creator or that man does not have a special immortal soul which only God can create.

And that fallacy leads to a bunch of illogical thinking.

One day in the future we may hear that a team of historians with a mountain of academic credentials, has discovered proof positive that Jesus Christ never existed. When we dispute their findings their will be no shortage of people ready to call us idiots, for daring to contradict people with PHD's from Princeton, Harvard and Oxford.

Theologians are those who pray and experience God "theoria".

Atheists are those who study God with a view to dissect Him into tiny parts so that He no longer exists. Many scholarly "theologians" have become atheists or agnostics due to their metaphysical studies. Can we truthfully call them "theologians?"

In this case wouldn't PHD = Pin Head Dummies?

Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy, and vain deceit; according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ. Colossian 2:8

Yes, in my opinion the traditional understandings of the Fall and the origins of man and sin to me fall apart in the face of the Neo-Darwinian synthesis (evolution + Mendelian genetics).

You might find this interesting.

http://www.thetablet.co.uk/reviews/377

The first humans did not have "parents" - but were a new creation from out of a previous, lesser creation (be it dust or beast). They are our first parents.

These first humans disobeyed God. There is no other origin of Original Sin. This is it's origin, as is revealed to us in Holy Scripture and Tradition.

Thanks, AMM. I'll check it out in a minute.

Elizabeth Maria,

I must disagree with you re: God can't be the Creator and that we don't have immortal souls if evolution is true.

The Catholic Church tells its adherents that we are not by any means required to believe in Creation and that good, orthodox Catholics can believe in evolution. If evolution were such a threat to God's position as Creator and and somehow proves that we humans don't have souls, then the Catholic Church would never, ever teach that it was acceptable to believe in evolution.

There has to be another way, and I think John is going the direction that's making the most sense to me. It answers my question in a vague fashion, at least. I'm still not totally clear on it, and I have yet to check out AMM's link (but the fact that it's from The Tablet scares me!).

The fact remains that since Christianity is True and worships He Who is Truth itself, that true and accurate scientific discoveries can never go against the truths of our Faith. And from our Faith we know that Original Sin has somehow entered into humanity by the Fall of our First Parents, and, I'm sorry, evolution seems more or less to be true.

I am not just going to shut off my brain and not ask questions. I vehemently believe that that is definitely not the answer, and that since I believe Christianity to be true I have nothing to worry about. I am just trying to get a few things straight that I've been wondering about.

Alexis