RE: [asa] biological evolution and a literal Adam- logically inconsistent?

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of gordon brown
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 1:53 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] biological evolution and a literal Adam- logically inconsistent?

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

> To believe in evolution and a real Adam, it would require that item 1 is figurative, since we know that Adam was not made from the dust of the ground literally.

The Bible also says that all of us are made of dust. (See Gen. 18:27 and
Psalm 103:14.) If you think about where the material in our bodies
ultimately comes from, it is literally true that we are dust. Thus I
consider this use of the word dust to be literal rather than figurative
since it is not a mere analogy.

Gordon Brown (ASA member)
. . . . . . . .
I don't get that response. If God made man from dust, and it is literally true, that means he really scooped up real dust. If God didn't really scoop up real dust, then it is a figurative saying.

When the Bible says we are all made of dust (Gen. 18:27 and
Psalm 103:14), maybe it is referring to the ancient science when they thought Adam really was literally made from real dust?

Today we may say our bodies are made of stardust (considering cosmological evolution), but there's no way they could have had that idea, I think.

...Bernie

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Aug 31 21:58:57 2008