To: GOPPachyderm
"It creates a real problem for those who want to say that God used evolution to create Adam and Eve!"
Indeed it does: for your interpretation of Scripture. Clearly, then -- since evolution is about as widely accepted among scientists as anything -- your interpretation is most likely be wrong.
It always boggles my mind that some Christians can readily accept some stories as symbols but other stories must be taken literally.
When Scripture says Jesus is sitting at God's right hand, must that be literally interpreted too? Must we accept that God is a physical entity in the clouds with two arms and has Jesus physically sitting next to him for all eternity?
148 posted on
11/18/2005 10:27:43 AM PST by
BackInBlack
("The act of defending any of the cardinal virtues has today all the exhilaration of a vice.")
To: BackInBlack
Of course not, there are definitely times when the Bible is not meant to be interpreted literally, such as hyperbole and the instances you reference.
However, I don't see reason to interpret the account in Genesis figuratively. I see a problem with God saying that creation was good when in theory it was littered with the corpses of previous ancestors. I have a problem with Adam and Eve portrayed as brutish beings that have evolved to our high standards today - like Hugh Jackman and Halle Berry, for example. ;)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson