by BlackSwan of Memphis 36 Replies latest jw friends
Ok I've been trying to understand this...
There are a good number of Christians out there who most definitely believe that God used evolution as a means of Creating us. For instance, I am pretty sure that the Catholic Church accepts this idea.
If man came about by evolution, how does sin come into play? At what point did man sin and how does the story of Adam and Eve fit into this picture?
There are a good number of Christians out there who most definitely believe that God used evolution as a means of Creating us.
Agreed, however Im not one.
If man came about by evolution, how does sin come into play? At what point did man sin and how does the story of Adam and Eve fit into this picture?
Whats always confounded me is, in the story line of evolution when and how did moral code evolve, and from what foundation did it have to evolve from?
Elderwho:
I suppse I don't really have a problem with moral code slowly evolving over the centuries. In fact it makes sense to me. I can't imagine it wouldn't take long before a prehuman figured out that when his neighbor "asked" him if he stole his bear hide that if he lied and said the other guy did it, the neighbor wouldn't beat him with his club. Further, it wouldn't take long for the concept of lying is wrong to come around when the guy that did get beat found out why.
That's just my opinion and I have no facts to back it up.
BSM,
I suppse I don't really have a problem with moral code slowly evolving over the centuries.
Yes, but evolving from what? Does non-moral or im-moral code give birth to moral-code?
I can't imagine it wouldn't take long before a prehuman figured out that when his neighbor "asked" him if he stole his bear hide
Is your premise based on bad behavior is natural.
Maybe one problem is the definition of sin. To have the concept of justice and mercy one must also have the idea of intellectual law or a theoretical standard not defined by physics but one that relies upon conscious choice. This to me sums up the Eden scenario, there was a choice (and therefore a law) there was a consequence (justice) and there was also an external mitigation of the justice (mercy). Now critically all these elements are external to the human condition as recorded by the bible (with no forbidden fruit none of the other elements are needed) and are all introduced to the scenario by God. We are then asked why God would introduce this game that is a lobster trap (once chosen there is no way back - all of the family of Adam must die) and we are given a simple hint - its all about knowledge (to be like the gods.) Thus we can suggest that sin isn't about breaking an artificial law per se its about failing to be like the Gods and correctly identify between good and evil , light and dark, knowledge and innocence. If we see all ensuing commandments as pointing to gaining further knowledge and that sin is actually the persuance of choices that limit or restrict knowledge then we see that Adam's trasgression is not a sin (that requires knowledge that comes after the first transgression) neither is Jesus's preparing corn on the Sabbath (this is an example of law designed to teach a principle that Jesus already knew ergo he was freed from that law as he would live it in all scenarios when it was applicable). From an evolutionary standpoint sin then comes about when 'the' law and knowledge can be conceptualised and transmitted or when man learns to speak (and write).
Hi Blackswan,
I was raise Catholic, then was a JW for 35 years, and now I am currently a practicing Catholic again. The Catholic Church does not take an official position on this matter, but leaves it to one's conscience. How does it work then, when dealing with original sin?
Historic Catholic teaching for nearly 2,000 years is that God "formed" man, and gave him a soul. Reference how Genesis words the text shoing human are made or formed from the dust of the ground, mthus allowing for the forming processes of evolution of the human species. Once the "formed" human received a soul, he became like God as a sentient self-aware being. It was not Adam's body that sinned, but his mind and heart, his soul that sinned. It was Adam's soul or spirit that died the day he disobeyed. It was the human soul that Jesus came to save. This is why Jesus is referred to in scripture as a "life-giving spirit."
It is the Jehovah's Witnesses who confuse everything by putting emphasis on the physical body, the physical and material rewards, and ignores the truly spiritual aspects of the Christian faith.
Jim Whitney
I am just beginning to read up on this subject - but if you're interested a good place to start might be googling "evolutionary psychology." The link below gives an introduction and also a synopsis of some of the contibutors to the field.
http://www.evoyage.com/Whatis.html
girasole
Yes, but evolving from what? Does non-moral or im-moral code give birth to moral-code?
Define moral for the animal kingdom. Define moral for humans.
What is the moral code?
Is your premise based on bad behavior is natural.
Ok, define bad behaviour. Think baby steps. Not trying to sound sarcastic, really. I am just trying to give you an idea how it might have occurred. The very concept of good and bad could have been developed over many centuries. I think it is possible it all has a lot to do with patterns of behaviour and culture.
Qcmbr:
Maybe one problem is the definition of sin.
Very true.
Thus we can suggest that sin isn't about breaking an artificial law per se its about failing to be like the Gods and correctly identify between good and evil , light and dark, knowledge and innocence.
So then the Gods left it up to us to figure out what is right and wrong, good and evil? How do we know how they define this?
From an evolutionary standpoint sin then comes about when 'the' law and knowledge can be conceptualised and transmitted or when man learns to speak (and write).
I think this makes sense. Once it is realized that murder is 'wrong' then the laws become applicable?
Historic Catholic teaching for nearly 2,000 years is that God "formed" man, and gave him a soul. Reference how Genesis words the text shoing human are made or formed from the dust of the ground, mthus allowing for the forming processes of evolution of the human species. Once the "formed" human received a soul, he became like God as a sentient self-aware being. It was not Adam's body that sinned, but his mind and heart, his soul that sinned. It was Adam's soul or spirit that died the day he disobeyed. It was the human soul that Jesus came to save. This is why Jesus is referred to in scripture as a "life-giving spirit."
This is pretty interesting. Was it human kind in general that received a soul, or is it the general consenus among Catholics that the story of Adam is real to some extent? (Would this be in the Catechism at all?)
girasole: Thank you so much for the link!
I think the idea of what is good or bad is at the root of the Eden story - unlike the JWs who think we could have been happy without the Fall I think we can only recognise happiness because of the fall. I think we have to live as individuals and find out for ourselves what is right and what is wrong. If and when there is any post-life reckoning we then stand knowing good and evil 'as the gods' having found our own path and having a wealth of experiences both observed and experienced upon which to base decisions. Clearly the God of the OT and NT is constantly changing His mind on what is required (otherwise we would all still be sacrificing animals on Altars like Abel, there would be no circumcision and no sacrament) so we can conclude that the actual act of worship itself has no intrinsic value but the important thing therefore is the attitude of worship itself (as the story of Cain and Abel explains.) If one is humble one is teachable, the more humble one is the more 'divine' knowledge can be shared and the less perscriptive the law becomes. This to me is like a lot of disciplines (at school you start repetitively copying letters, in some martial arts you may start doing simple menial tasks) if you avoid 'sin' you can then progress to more knowledge. If you reject the basic teachings however, you always stay at the level you are or even regress. True religion then becomes an utter celebration and embrace of life using the Golden Rule to govern (and if you've schooled your selfish desires using all the smaller laws you will be in a far greater position to be selfless when dealing with larger matters.) In fact it is a sin not to go out and experience all you can (using wisdom not hedonism as the guide!)
Morality - good - bad - sin are all subjective terms. Even the alleged god of The Bible - Jehovah, showed how expendable his own laws and principles were when it suited him.
The whole universe is in a continued state of evolution, seeking to advance and improve. This how life works. Morality is conduct that benefits the human race and allows it to continue its evolutionary journey.
The Watchtower Society said in their Evolution book, that evolution was like an explosion in a printing factory producing an encyclopaedia. This is an ignorant statement. Evolution is not a blind process but an intelligent process, in the same way as we talk about - the evolution of the motor car but we do not think it happened as a result of an explosion in a car factory.
