I think I finally reconciled evolution with Genesis and Original Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatholicIllini
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CatholicIllini

Guest
Ok, so I know I am not a theologian or a scientist, but I think I finally found a way to reconcile evolution with Genesis and Original Sin. Of course, it requires reading Genesis not as literal truth, but as being allegorical. My ideas may not be entirely original, but I want to know what you guys think of this interpretation:

Evolution and paleoanthropology have more or less proved that modern humans evolved over time from simpler organisms and that the first humanoids appeared hundreds-of-thousands of years ago. From a theological standpoint, this begs the question: When were humans first given a soul? When did original sin occur? Where did evil come from? Are those prehistoric humans in heaven?

From our faith we know that, at some point, God decided that man had evolved enough for a soul. After millions of years, an organism finally reached the evolutionary threshold at which God deemed it worthy of possessing an immortal soul. Perhaps this was 50,000 years ago, when modern scientists claim that behaviorally modern humans emerged; it may have been 200,000 years ago when the first homo sapiens appeared - we do not know. At first, he may have deemed only one human worthy of a soul (Adam), or he may have given souls to many humans containing certain genetic and behavioral characteristics.

However, evolution itself suggests that someone had to be the first human. If we accept the theory of gradual evolution, there still has to be a point at which an organism goes from non-human to human. Perhaps the parents of the first human were themselves non-human, but when their genetic material was combined the resulting offspring was a human. The genetic mutation that differentiated the first man from his parents might have been a small one, but that does not mean it was an insignificant one. It may have been that one mutation that made God see that man as fit to be the first true soul-possessing human-being. And if that man existed 50,000 – 200,000 years ago, it is plausible that we are all descendants of him.

But whether the first human was one man or a group of people, we know that these humans lived in a pristine natural world (the metaphorical Garden of Eden) and were able to hunt and gather from the abundance that God provided. Scientific research suggests that even early humans had a belief in God and the afterlife. From this we can assume that God made himself known to these humans, either through external revelation (God walking in the Garden), or through the internal yearning that they felt for him in their hearts.

However, even though humans now possessed souls and knew of the existence of God, they did not yet know the difference between right and wrong. They still lived according to their animalistic instincts. They had evolved from animals and therefore lived like animals. They acted selfishly for the benefit of their own survival. But since they did not know that their selfishness was wrong, they did not mortally sin. They lived their entire lives in spiritual childhood. Just as children cannot commit mortal sin because they cannot comprehend that their actions are wrong, neither could the early humans. My belief is that this is how God intended it to be. Man possessed free will, but since he did not know wrong, he could not willingly choose it. The only choice was God, because that is all that man knew. He may have still committed venial sin by following his animalistic desires, but this would not have prevented him from being saved. An all-loving God would not punish humans for ignorance that was no fault of their own. Presumably, these venal sins would be burned away in purgatory.

Then the devil intervened. It may have been during the lives of the very first humans, as Genesis suggests, or it may have been later. The devil’s goal was to show man the difference between right and wrong (the knowledge of the gods) in order to show them the true error of their ways. His goal was to destroy man’s spiritual childhood. Once humans knew that their actions were wrong and offensive to God, what were once venial sins now became mortal sins. Since humans still possessed their selfish animal instincts, it was very hard for them to avoid doing what they now knew was offensive to God. They continued to submit to their selfish instincts, and therefore committed mortal sin. So the Original Sin was not the first time humans sinned period, but the first time they mortally sinned, for they knowingly chose to do wrong instead of right. This created the need for a Savior to redeem man.
 
Nice story and imagination, but can you prove it? You know, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidences.
 
I don’t think my theory can be any more or less proven than anything other theory on evolution and original sin. But I think that science would have to agree that someone had to be the first human, just like one fish had to be the first to crawl out onto land.
 
Ok, so I know I am not a theologian or a scientist, but I think I finally found a way to reconcile evolution with Genesis and Original Sin. Of course, it requires reading Genesis not as literal truth, but as being allegorical. My ideas may not be entirely original, but I want to know what you guys think of this interpretation:
Yep, that’s what it is, simply YOUR interpretation. 👍

Surely you don’t expect anyone to agree with you, other than a non-believer of the Bible or the magisterium of the catholic church. :confused:
 
Interesting comments on one of my favorite lessons from the bible. But I think you’ll really have trouble with this one:
However, even though humans now possessed souls and knew of the existence of God, they did not yet know the difference between right and wrong.
They knew the wrong because God told them.
 
I think, like you, we see in the archeological record the time when the human intellect began. Cave paintings marking a rich culture,. tools, weapons, the apprehension of eternal realities, the formation of a governing state. In my view these are records of human life outside the garden. Human life subject to the powers of nature. Human bodies that have inherited death.

Human life that does not need to survive is profoundly different. The body didn’t require other living creatures for sustenance.No reason to hunt. All the urges associated with the survival needs of a body that’s going to die would change or disappear. If our earthly lives were notmeant to end in a seperation of body and soul but a lifting up of body and soul it’s reasonable to believe that our earthly lives began in as profoundly a different way as well. I know there is no need for a childhood because the earth is already a crib to mankind.

Faith offers too many possibilities to limit to the current understandings of science imo.🙂
 
I don’t think my theory can be any more or less proven than anything other theory on evolution and original sin. But I think that science would have to agree that someone had to be the first human, just like one fish had to be the first to crawl out onto land.
I don’t completly agree that someone had to be the first human, I’m not too much into evolution, but I think species are here due to natural selection and life conditions, and they evolved seperately by time (not all of them), I don’t completely think that all species had one origin, they could have been formed separately, Because I wonder, how worms and insects are formed in bad food in an area allowing this to happen without having any being from their same specie as origin? do they have bacterias as origin? Are we all derived from earthly bacterias?
 
Ok, so I know I am not a theologian or a scientist, but I think I finally found a way to reconcile evolution with Genesis and Original Sin. Of course, it requires reading Genesis not as literal truth, but as being allegorical. My ideas may not be entirely original, but I want to know what you guys think of this interpretation:

Evolution and paleoanthropology have more or less proved that modern humans evolved over time from simpler organisms and that the first humanoids appeared hundreds-of-thousands of years ago. From a theological standpoint, this begs the question: When were humans first given a soul? When did original sin occur? Where did evil come from? Are those prehistoric humans in heaven?

From our faith we know that, at some point, God decided that man had evolved enough for a soul. After millions of years, an organism finally reached the evolutionary threshold at which God deemed it worthy of possessing an immortal soul. Perhaps this was 50,000 years ago, when modern scientists claim that behaviorally modern humans emerged; it may have been 200,000 years ago when the first homo sapiens appeared - we do not know. At first, he may have deemed only one human worthy of a soul (Adam), or he may have given souls to many humans containing certain genetic and behavioral characteristics.

However, evolution itself suggests that someone had to be the first human. If we accept the theory of gradual evolution, there still has to be a point at which an organism goes from non-human to human. Perhaps the parents of the first human were themselves non-human, but when their genetic material was combined the resulting offspring was a human. The genetic mutation that differentiated the first man from his parents might have been a small one, but that does not mean it was an insignificant one. It may have been that one mutation that made God see that man as fit to be the first true soul-possessing human-being. And if that man existed 50,000 – 200,000 years ago, it is plausible that we are all descendants of him.

But whether the first human was one man or a group of people, we know that these humans lived in a pristine natural world (the metaphorical Garden of Eden) and were able to hunt and gather from the abundance that God provided. Scientific research suggests that even early humans had a belief in God and the afterlife. From this we can assume that God made himself known to these humans, either through external revelation (God walking in the Garden), or through the internal yearning that they felt for him in their hearts.

However, even though humans now possessed souls and knew of the existence of God, they did not yet know the difference between right and wrong. They still lived according to their animalistic instincts. They had evolved from animals and therefore lived like animals. They acted selfishly for the benefit of their own survival. But since they did not know that their selfishness was wrong, they did not mortally sin. They lived their entire lives in spiritual childhood. Just as children cannot commit mortal sin because they cannot comprehend that their actions are wrong, neither could the early humans. My belief is that this is how God intended it to be. Man possessed free will, but since he did not know wrong, he could not willingly choose it. The only choice was God, because that is all that man knew. He may have still committed venial sin by following his animalistic desires, but this would not have prevented him from being saved. An all-loving God would not punish humans for ignorance that was no fault of their own. Presumably, these venal sins would be burned away in purgatory.

Then the devil intervened. It may have been during the lives of the very first humans, as Genesis suggests, or it may have been later. The devil’s goal was to show man the difference between right and wrong (the knowledge of the gods) in order to show them the true error of their ways. His goal was to destroy man’s spiritual childhood. Once humans knew that their actions were wrong and offensive to God, what were once venial sins now became mortal sins. Since humans still possessed their selfish animal instincts, it was very hard for them to avoid doing what they now knew was offensive to God. They continued to submit to their selfish instincts, and therefore committed mortal sin. So the Original Sin was not the first time humans sinned period, but the first time they mortally sinned, for they knowingly chose to do wrong instead of right. This created the need for a Savior to redeem man.
First off - humans did not evolve over time from simpler organisms. (see IDvolution)

Secondly, polygenism is a problem - see Humani Generis.
 
That’s an interesting theory, it’s a mark of intellect that you are willing to think about these things with sincerity.

Sometimes when I read Genesis, I seem to get the impression that it talks about a switch from animal to human. Of course, only because I put it in the context of the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 6:25:

25 “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?"

In this Christ explains that God provides for the animals of the world, so they do not worry. In Genesis we learn that the first humans lacked nothing, they were taken care of by God, and needed not to worry.

Of course, like you I am no theologian, just speculating.

Interestingly enough, I found myself thanking God for evolution last night (long story). Sometimes I have trouble accepting evolution (because science is always changing, so I don’t want to base my faith on something that may end up being revised), but some passages in Genesis seem to make more sense to me in light of Evolution.

Such as Genesis 1:24 “Then God said, “LET THE EARTH BRING FORTH living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so”

This and Genesis’ teaching that the Universe was created out of nothing, are pretty revolutionary ideas for the people of Abraham’s and Moses’ time.

Those civilizations believed that the universe was eternal, and men descended from the gods. Then this tribe of Hebrews start saying that the universe was not eternal, and that men came from dust! That’s pretty radical thinking.

Ultimately, Genesis, along with the Bible is not about scientific facts (though it contains truths), it is about spiritual facts. It is about man’s reconciliation with God.
 
Evolution and paleoanthropology have more or less proved that modern humans evolved over time from simpler organisms and that the first humanoids appeared hundreds-of-thousands of years ago.
I disagree with the first premises. I don’t think this has been proved at all. Not even a little bit.
 
I don’t completly agree that someone had to be the first human, I’m not too much into evolution, but I think species are here due to natural selection and life conditions, and they evolved seperately by time (not all of them), I don’t completely think that all species had one origin, they could have been formed separately, Because I wonder, how worms and insects are formed in bad food in an area allowing this to happen without having any being from their same specie as origin? do they have bacterias as origin? Are we all derived from earthly bacterias?
You can’t possibly mean what it sounds like you’re saying. Are you saying that worms develop in bad food? As in they are formed from the bad food because they don’t have any origin from their same species as origin? This is so scientifically incorrect.

Francesco Fredi:
In one experiment, Redi took six jars, which he divided in two groups of three: in the first jar of each group, he put an unknown object; in the second, a dead fish; in the last, a raw chunk of veal. Redi took the first group of three, and covered the tops with fine gauze so that only air could get into it. He left the other group of jars open. After several days, he saw maggots appear on the objects in the open jars, on which flies had been able to land, but not in the gauze-covered jars.

He continued his experiments by capturing the maggots and waiting for them to metamorphose, which they did, becoming flies. Also, when dead flies or maggots were put in sealed jars with dead animals or veal, no maggots appeared, but when the same thing was done with living flies, maggots did.
 
OP, what about the fact that the one man, Christ, came to undo the havoc the one man, Adam, had wrought? Unless I’m missing something in your scenario, you’re saying that it wasn’t a real sole man (Adam), but rather humanity in general, right?
 
You can’t possibly mean what it sounds like you’re saying. Are you saying that worms develop in bad food? As in they are formed from the bad food because they don’t have any origin from their same species as origin? This is so scientifically incorrect.

Francesco Fredi:
In one experiment, Redi took six jars, which he divided in two groups of three: in the first jar of each group, he put an unknown object; in the second, a dead fish; in the last, a raw chunk of veal. Redi took the first group of three, and covered the tops with fine gauze so that only air could get into it. He left the other group of jars open. After several days, he saw maggots appear on the objects in the open jars, on which flies had been able to land, but not in the gauze-covered jars.

He continued his experiments by capturing the maggots and waiting for them to metamorphose, which they did, becoming flies. Also, when dead flies or maggots were put in sealed jars with dead animals or veal, no maggots appeared, but when the same thing was done with living flies, maggots did.
I never said that what I mentioned is totally right. I mentioned the types of insects and worms that grow in closed boxes and bottles, where no insects could ever land to give birth to their own specie. After long time, months or years, you see insects and worms made by long-time food, how is this explained?
 
I never said that what I mentioned is totally right. I mentioned the types of insects and worms that grow in closed boxes and bottles, where no insects could ever land to give birth to their own specie. After long time, months or years, you see insects and worms made by long-time food, how is this explained?
In his experiments, Francesco Fredi was invalidating the theory you propose; Spontaneous generation. So than I will give you the same answer you gave the OP [below this line].
**
Nice story and imagination, but can you prove it? You know, extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidences.
**
 
In his experiments, Francesco Fredi was invalidating the theory you propose; Spontaneous generation. So than I will give you the same answer you gave the OP [below this line].

Jcnava15 you are right, I never said that I’m right, or that I want others to accept it as truth without evidences, I even not sure about what I said, so studying ‘the theory’ more would be a good thing, but maybe it was not disproved by the example you mentioned, try it at your home, put some cereals, beans or something in glasse box that no insect or fly could ever come in and wait months or years without opening it you see a specific types of species in there that you don’t find outside the box, again I’m trying to get a rational or scientific explanation for it before claiming that is ‘a theory’. Also it could depend on the temperature you have in your country, if its so cold, those insects may not show up.
 
I think the real question is when did serpents lose their ability to talk!!! I mean, Adam and Eve thought nothing of talking to a snake, right?
 
I don’t think my theory can be any more or less proven than anything other theory on evolution and original sin. But I think that science would have to agree that someone had to be the first human, just like one fish had to be the first to crawl out onto land.
I like your “theory”, and this is partial of what I had posted in another topic:

I believe that when God created first man and first woman, all the various types of our genes were present in perfection. (No genetic disorders, no disease carrying alleles). They would have carried the recessive genes for human traits such as color of eyes, skin, hair, height, and over time through populating of the world all these various traits became apparent, and over time alleles did mutate to produce those disorders/difference of dwarfism, diseases/disorders, etc.

Scientists have used what is mtDNA to trace our human evolution/ancestry:

web.mit.edu/racescience/in_media/what_dna_says_about_human/index.html

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) indicates that all living humans descend from one maternal source—christened Mitochondrial Eve—who lived in Africa between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. Similarly, the Y chromosome shows that all men have a common ancestor, Y-chromosome Adam, who lived at the same time. (Actually, both analyses indicate that modern humans descend from a small founding population of about 5000 men and an equal number of women.) The time estimates are based on assumptions on how frequently genetic mutations occur. The mutation clocks of mitochondrial DNA and the Y chromosome tick at different speeds, so the fact that they both indicate humans emerged at the same historical moment makes this evidence much more convincing.

The theory of evolution is ever-changing, in my opinion, because as time has shown, we are discovering “new” fossils of ancestors of the evolution of humans/apes that change the previous theories/hypothesis. In 2004, another discovery, Pierolapithecus catalaunicus, is now theorized as possibly being the last common ancestor of the human and ape before the evolutionary split.

blessings,
CEM

P.S.

Regardless, we are told that God created us from the dust of the earth and to dust we shall return. Dust of the earth could also tie in with evolution in that all life came from the earth. The smallest mircroorganism to the largest mammal. Science and Scripture don’t really conflict when we put things in perspective.
 
agapebiblestudy.com/documents/What%20Catholics%20believe%20about%20Creation.htm
Magisterium of the Catholic Church has defined what Catholics must believe about the history of creation:
The creation by God of all things at the beginning of time
The special creation by God of man
Formation of woman from man
Unity of the human race
The original happiness of our first parents in a state of justice
The divine command laid upon man by God to prove obedience
Transgression of that command at the instigation of the devil in the form of a serpent
The fall of our original parents from their primitive state of innocence.
The promise of a future redeemer
Humanae Generis, Pope Pius XII [also see: Dr. S. Hahn: Genesis 1-22: The Covenant as a Family Affair; Pope Pius X: Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Sept. 8, 1907].
The Catholic Church rejects the theory that the first chapters of Genesis are pure myth. For what the catechism teaches about creation see the Catechism of the Catholic Church #s 198, 279-327.
everything else is just the minor details. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top