Wednesday, April 25, 2012

A Letter to a "Christian Evolutionist":

I agreed with everything you said until:

“[Jesus’ use] of the passage [Matthew 19:4-6] to convey that message [against divorce] does not require a literal couple [Adam and Eve] … to assume that it does require a literal couple is something we impose on the text.”

Do we really impose a “literal couple” on the text or are they truly intended as historical? Here’s why a literal Adam and Eve are imperative:

  1. The Matthew 19 quotation literally and historically states that “the Creator 'MADE them male and female,'” an historic truth echoed elsewhere in the Bible. It also says that He historically “JOINED [them] together.” Had He not done so – if this is only a fable – Jesus’ conclusion would not logically follow: “Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." If God hadn’t historically and physically joined them together, the rationale for our physically separating them through divorce falls apart.
  1. Besides this, there are many other reasons to regard them as historical. If they aren’t, then their children aren’t and then even their children aren’t, and Abraham and the other Patriarchs aren’t historical either.
  1. Other passages in the Old Testament also regard Adam as historical, like 1 Chron. 1:1.
  1. Further, their historicity is assured by Paul (Romans 5, 15 along with the historicity of the Fall), Jude 14, Jesus’ historical genealogies, and other NT passages.   
When evolution becomes a reality, then all Biblical assertions – like the historicity of Adam and Eve - must be called into question. This casts uncertainty upon the totality of Scripture and undermines faith and assurance. The willingness of “Christian evolutionists” to adopt this uncertainty regarding Scripture not only means the demise of the church. It also tragically reflects the condition of one’s own heart and the true object of one’s “first love.”

No comments:

Post a Comment