Am a Christian trying to teach Genesis. The problem is Adam's and Eve's creation and scientific facts.

Question

In the book of Genesis Adam and Eve in their speech were clearly fluent. They were also advanced enough for God to give them dominion over the Earth and even names the species, and so forth.

PROBLEM: It is a fact that earlier man existed that did not have this capability. He had advancmements human, uprightness, painting and drawing (but not writing language), tool making, and other things that would separate him from apes.

Following the Bible we could dismiss say Peking Man and Java Man as for the sake of argument not being actually human--so Adam's and Eve's creation would not necessarily conflict with this. The problem is Modern Man, homo sapiens sapiens and Neanderthal men. They clearly did exist. Neanderthal died out. But we have come from homo sapiens sapiens which did survive, but did not initially have the ability that Adam and Eve had in speech, intelligence, and so forth.

How does a Christian resolve this dilemma? All replies greatly appreciated.

Answer 1

"It is a fact that earlier man existed that did not have this capability."
Even if one concedes this to be a "fact" (and a hotly disputed one), one would have to presuppose that human history has been an inexorable march of progress to conclude that such a lack of fluency prohibits the Neanderthals from being descendants of Adam and Eve who lost such a capability. And neither the mtDNA nor the morphological evidence clearly distinguishes the Neanderthal as an entirely separate species from "modern human".

Answer 2

My therory about neanderthal man is this:
One thing i notice about a lot of people is the effect sin has on their body. How ones thoughts and moods not to mention life style, have a dramatic effect on ones appearence and genetic traits. Not to mention when Adam and Eve sined and fell from God's presence it had to of have not just spiritual but physical changes. The bible says the whole world suffered because of sin. Now before the flood, the world was a horible place with emence evil, more so than even today's standerds. So imagine what people might look like if everyone in the world was greatly sinfull except one family, Noah(homo-sapiens). And of course neanderthal died off from the flood.

One thing you need to also remember is science is not always right. The world was once thought to be flat, the universe was geocentric, the single cell was simple, and ones skull shape dictated his personality. Make sure your faith is stronger in God and not in men with lab coats.

Answer 3

We (as humans) will never know how exactly the world came about as we know it. There are several possiblities, all just as likely as the next. I have heard some very "Bible-only" Christians say that God created an old Earth, and that He created evidence of evolution to test us. I don't know if I believe that, but that's one explanation.

Here's the one I believe and was told by my [Catholic] priest. He said that evolution certainly could have been part of God's plan. It is mathematically illogical to think that we could have just "evolved" on our own. He is very intelligent and was able to prove this; I, however, cannot. What Adam and Eve represent are the first "real" humans. At some point, God put into these two creatures free will and an immortal soul. Whether or not they were the first "beings" he created is debatable. I believe that God elevated these two creatues above all else that he had created.

All of this depends on your beliefs. If you are a Fundamentalist, you will probably take the "old Earth" theory. However, theory two provides space for scientific fact and religion to coexist. I find it hard for science NOT to prove the existence of God.

Answer 4

Maybe you could admit that the ancient people who created the creation story had no clue at all about it and created the creation myth.

Then teach it like a fable and get them to understand what it says about wilfulness and free will. What is teaches about actions and the responsibility for our actions.
If you try to make it literal truth you are missing the whole point of the story.

The Bible is not a science text. It is a collection of moralistic stories with a bit of really poor history included.

Notice that the people who made the story up did not care in the slightest where Eden was. Could not have cared less about how many acres it covered. Did not even bother to name the Forbidden Fruit and did not even keep the order of creation straight or how Eve was created the same in both versions.

Answer 5

I believe the Bible, period. If it says that Adam and Eve were the first humans God made, the first people in the world, then that's what I believe. Part of being a Christian is having the faith to take God's word at face value. Faith cannot be proven to the non-believer; people will choose to believe what they want to believe, but as a Christian I don't believe we can question what the Word of God tells us. If you do, you must question your faith as well.

Answer 6

Couldn't Adam and Eve be taught as a metaphor for the entrance of consciousness and sin into human development? As a mother, I really appreciate your willingness to work in a bit of science with religion. It shows that they aren't quite so exclusive as extremists on both sides in our society would have us believe.

Answer 7

Try studying the works of some accomplished scientists who, also, are committed Christians. Here are links to the webpages of a few such scientists.

Answer 8

PROBLEM: The fact you stated is merely a scientific idea. If you can't go back into the biblical days then you can't say how civilization or people were back then. If you weren't there, you can't say what happened.

Answer 9

The christians resolve the dilemma by ignoring everything except the bible... that way there is no dilemma for them. God created everything and not much has changed since then.

Answer 10

its a myth.
dont you know what a myth is?
most cultures have creation myths.
study some of them.

is it really so important
stuff that happened so long ago?