Re: [asa] New IVP book Should Christians Embrace Evolution

From: John Walley <>
Date: Fri Nov 27 2009 - 22:30:06 EST

#8 is an extension of #7. I think they mean that is when nature began to be red in tooth and claw. YEC's believe that was due to Adam's sin and the curse.


----- Original Message ----
From: gordon brown <Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU>
Sent: Fri, November 27, 2009 10:23:04 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] New IVP book Should Christians Embrace Evolution

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Dave Wallace wrote:

> Should Christians Embrace Evolution
> Appears that IVP is pushing this book hard.  Anyone in the UK read it yet?
>      It may at first seem easy to say ?God simply used evolution to
>      bring about the results he desired?, as some are proposing
>      today. That view is called ?theistic evolution?. However, the
>      contributors to this volume, both scientists and biblical
>      scholars, show that adopting theistic evolution leads to many
>      positions contrary to the teaching of the Bible, such as these:
>      (1) Adam and Eve were not the first human beings, but they were
>      just two Neolithic farmers among about ten million other human
>      beings on earth at that time, and God just chose to reveal
>      himself to them in a personal way. (2) Those other human beings
>      had already been seeking to worship and serve God or gods in
>      their own ways. (3) Adam was not specially formed by God of
>      ?dust from the ground? (Gen. 2:7) but had two human parents. (4)
>      Eve was not directly made by God out of a ?rib that the Lord God
>      had taken from the man? (Gen. 2:22), but she also had two human
>      parents. (5) Many human beings both then and now are not
>      descended from Adam and Eve. (6) Adam and Eve?s sin was not the
>      first sin. (7) Human physical death had occurred for thousands
>      of years before Adam and Eve?s sin ? it was part of the way
>      living things had always existed. (8) God did not impose any
>      alteration in the natural world when he cursed the ground
>      because of Adam?s sin.

I have a comment prompted by number 8. I have the impression that today's YECs tend to ignore the Biblical implication that the Garden of Eden was a special place different from the area around it. The land described in Genesis 2:5a was certainly not lush. Adam's expulsion from the Garden would have caused him to have to work much harder even with no change in the environment outside the Garden.

Gordon Brown (ASA member)


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 27 22:30:18 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 27 2009 - 22:30:18 EST