Old Earth and Original Sin

[Youssarian]

From what I know of Old Earth theology, Genesis 1-11 or around there are considered allegory/metaphorical. However, Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned." According to this and other things I've learned, original sin is what caused death to enter the universe. If the part of Genesis talking about original sin and the fall of man are allegorical, how did sin enter mankind in the Old Earth view, given that animals, hominids, and presumably humans existing before 6-10,000 years ago?

[HoboTone]

I think you are on to something, my friend. Could it possibly be the Bible actually means what it says? We're all smarter than the apostle Paul because we have modern science.......right? After all, we can trust the fact that geologists can accurately measure the age of stone, can't we? Archaeologists and anthropologists don't have preconceived notions when dating artifacts, do they?

[Sojourner55]

Hello Youssarian,

Another point to consider with regard to Genesis is the prophecy of the "seed of the woman." The rabbis of old poured over that verse, pondering what it's meaning could be. It's the man who has seed, not the woman. We know today that this was a prophetic reference to the virgin birth of Jesus, and His victory over death and Satan. While many today try to say Christianity stole its ideas from various pagan religions, that prophetic passage is one of the oldest in all of sacred writ, and compelling evidence that Genesis is not all metaphor and allegory.

[Noeb]

From what I know of Old Earth theology, Genesis 1-11 or around there are considered allegory/metaphorical.

Not all Old Earthers think it's allegory/metaphorical. I don't.

However, Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned." According to this and other things I've learned, original sin is what caused death to enter the universe. If the part of Genesis talking about original sin and the fall of man are allegorical, how did sin enter mankind

Where does it says sin entered mankind?

in the Old Earth view, given that animals, hominids, and presumably humans existing before 6-10,000 years ago?

Humans existed before then? Maybe I have a different understand of Old Earth. I believe the earth is older but have no reason to think man is.

[Raybob]

...Humans existed before then? Maybe I have a different understand of Old Earth. I believe the earth is older but have no reason to think man is.

When God created everything that first week, He created Adam as a full grown man, not an infant. He was old enough on day one to till a garden and take care of things. Everything on the earth was created as old as it needed to be when it was created. including the rocks, however million years a rock has to exist before it's a rock. Just because something appears 100,000 years old, it appeared to be about the same age, the day it was created, 6,000+/- years ago.

[Boo]

It is also possible, since the bible does not tell us when "in the beginning" was, we don't know how old the "heavens and the earth" really are. What is does tell us is the story of the creation of those things ON the earth and in the seas.

Unfortunately, people seem to read into the first chapter of Genesis that the heavens and the earth were created at the same time. Scripture doesn't say that.

[John 8:32]

I think you are on to something, my friend. Could it possibly be the Bible actually means what it says? We're all smarter than the apostle Paul because we have modern science.......right? After all, we can trust the fact that geologists can accurately measure the age of stone, can't we? Archaeologists and anthropologists don't have preconceived notions when dating artifacts, do they?

Interestingly enough, living mollusks taken from rivers can date as much as 6,000 to 8,000 years old. Sure, I really trust carbon dating.

[John 8:32]

It is also possible, since the bible does not tell us when "in the beginning" was, we don't know how old the "heavens and the earth" really are. What is does tell us is the story of the creation of those things ON the earth and in the seas.

Unfortunately, people seem to read into the first chapter of Genesis that the heavens and the earth were created at the same time. Scripture doesn't say that.

There was a long period of time between Gen 1:1 and verse 2. Not an evolutionary period of time, but a time when the earth was created perfect, was destroyed by Satan's rebellion and then recreated as we see beginning in Gen 1:2 and completely recreated in 6 days. On the seventh day the Sabbath was created.

[Youssarian]

Not all Old Earthers think it's allegory/metaphorical. I don't.

Do you follow Gap Theory? How do to interpret the first part of Genesis?

Where does it says sin entered mankind?

I have generally understood Genesis 3 to be the fall of mankind, when sin entered the world. Following a literal interpretation of Genesis, this happened roughly 6 to 10,000 years ago.

Humans existed before then? Maybe I have a different understand of Old Earth. I believe the earth is older but have no reason to think man is.

Doing a brief Google search seems to show all sorts of numbers, however from my reading of these it seems Homo sapiens first appeared about 200,000 years ago.

[HoboTone]

There was a long period of time between Gen 1:1 and verse 2. Not an evolutionary period of time, but a time when the earth was created perfect, was destroyed by Satan's rebellion and then recreated as we see beginning in Gen 1:2 and completely recreated in 6 days. On the seventh day the Sabbath was created.

Right on. As soon as fresh lava cools and hardens, scientists will date it at 500,000+ years. How do you date sedimentary rock? By the fossils in it. How do you date the fossils? By what layer of sedimentary rock you find them in. I'm no expert, but I do know there is as much compelling evidence for a young earth as there is in an old one. Schools are only teaching one side of the date, and a lot of "data" is dubious at best.

[Noeb]

Do you follow Gap Theory?

Not entirely, but there's truth there.

How do to interpret the first part of Genesis?

v1 God created in the beginning. After is mostly a reconstruction from things already created.

I have generally understood Genesis 3 to be the fall of mankind, when sin entered the world.

Yes, well you said sin entered mankind. That's what I was curious about.

Doing a brief Google search seems to show all sorts of numbers, however from my reading of these it seems Homo sapiens first appeared about 200,000 years ago.

So when God said let us make man in our image, man existed already just not in his image? Angels (so much like man you can't tell the difference)? What were they? We don't know.

[Saved7]

From what I know of Old Earth theology, Genesis 1-11 or around there are considered allegory/metaphorical. However, Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned." According to this and other things I've learned, original sin is what caused death to enter the universe. If the part of Genesis talking about original sin and the fall of man are allegorical, how did sin enter mankind in the Old Earth view, given that animals, hominids, and presumably humans existing before 6-10,000 years ago?

you make an excellent point. The old earth views suggest that there is only a failure to survive. Therefore we evolved for survival, but how does sin fit into this mold? It cannot and if the old earth view is forced, then the book of Romans is wrong as is the story of Adam and Eve's fall, therefore, how does one believe anything in the Bible?

[teddyv]

Right on. As soon as fresh lava cools and hardens, scientists will date it at 500,000+ years.

At the risk of a derail, but upon what do you base such a statement?

How do you date sedimentary rock? By the fossils in it. How do you date the fossils? By what layer of sedimentary rock you find them in.

Not necessarily, at least not absolutely dated. Although radiometric dating can be done on sediments, ideally one would use an unaltered intrusive rock, then one could use stratigraphic principals to determine its relative age with respect to the intrusive. There are always variations, but it is not circular argument.

I'm no expert, but I do know there is as much compelling evidence for a young earth as there is in an old one. Schools are only teaching one side of the date, and a lot of "data" is dubious at best.

I'm closer to being an expert, though hardly well versed in the cutting edge science. There may be compelling young-earth evidence here and there, but taken together it does not produce a coherent story of the earth's history.

[Boo]

There does not have to be any conflict between science and scripture if we'd just understand what we are actually reading.

God gave us no age for dirt, mountains, and water. We know only that - in the beginning - God created the heavens and the Earth. If we would first accept that and start with the condition of the earth when God "recreated" inhabitants on the earth, it is all fitting together quite well.

We don't know anything not told to us in scriptures about the previous condition of the earth or its previous inhabitants. There could easily be fossils millions of years old. We just don't know. If we would admit that and accept the story of the current crop of humans at face value, we would have no conflict that I am aware of.

It is in someone trying to prove science wrong or prove scriptures wrong that our problems crop up.

[Jemand]

From what I know of Old Earth theology, Genesis 1-11 or around there are considered allegory/metaphorical. However, Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned." According to this and other things I've learned, original sin is what caused death to enter the universe. If the part of Genesis talking about original sin and the fall of man are allegorical, how did sin enter mankind in the Old Earth view, given that animals, hominids, and presumably humans existing before 6-10,000 years ago?

Hello Youssarian,

Another point to consider with regard to Genesis is the prophecy of the "seed of the woman." The rabbis of old poured over that verse, pondering what it's meaning could be. It's the man who has seed, not the woman. We know today that this was a prophetic reference to the virgin birth of Jesus, and His victory over death and Satan. While many today try to say Christianity stole its ideas from various pagan religions, that prophetic passage is one of the oldest in all of sacred writ, and compelling evidence that Genesis is not all metaphor and allegory.

The entire Book of Genesis is ancient oriental literature and it is studied by Old Testament scholars as such without any regard to modern-day science. Genesis 12-50 is written in the genre of literature commonly called the historical narrative. Genesis 1-11 is written in a very different genre of literature and Old Testament scholars have been, for the last 200 years, analyzing it and thoroughly comparing it with other ancient oriental literature. The general consensus today is that Genesis 1-11 belongs to the broad genre of literature commonly called ancient oriental epic literature, and that it is composed of a series of ancient epic tales (or sagas) that were redacted and woven together. Old Testament scholars differ somewhat, however, in their opinion as to the exact nature of these tales. Some scholars believe that they are based upon legends, others that they are based upon myths, yet others that they are based upon a combination of both legends and myths. The more conservative the scholar is in his Bibliology, the more likely he is to believe that the tales are based upon legends rather than myths. The more conservative the scholar is in his Bibliology, the more likely he is to believe that the tales were redacted and woven together through divine inspiration rather than human effort. The sciences of cosmology, biology, geology, etc., have nothing at all to do with this research and the conclusions drawn from it. They do, however, support it.

When the Bible is read without regard to the time and culture of the writers whom God used to pen the individual parts of the Bible, one is very likely to interpret it in a manner radically different from the intended interpretation. This is true of the first eleven chapters of Genesis, and it is also true of the reference in the New Testament to the characters and events mentioned in first eleven chapters of Genesis.

Precisely “accurate” history is a relatively new discipline that was unknown to the writers whom God used to pen Genesis 1-11, and the purpose of Genesis 1-11 was not to give us a precisely “accurate” account of historic events—the purpose of Genesis 1-11 was to give all readers down through the ages spiritual truths regarding God and our need for Him in our lives. From the beginning, men and women have chosen to disobey God and have suffered the consequences. Long ago, God saw the reality of this and began to put into motion a plan to save us from sin and its consequences through our personal faith in His Son Christ Jesus. Satan is all too aware of this, and he is hard at work leading men and women astray. If the time and effort that has been spent attempting to prove that the earth is young and that evolution is a hoax had instead been spent, as it should have been, in preaching the gospel under the anointing of the Holy Spirit, proclaiming the power of the truth to set free from sin those who are in bondage to it, we would have today very many more believers, and far fewer unbelievers.

As for Gen. 3:15,

15 “I will put enmity between you and the woman,
and between your offspring and hers;
he will strike your head,
and you will strike his heel.” (NRSV)

The meaning of this passage is very simple and straightforward—God will put enmity between the serpent and Eve, and He will put enmity between the offspring of the serpent and the offspring of Eve. The offspring of Eve will strike at the head of the serpent, and the serpent will strike at the heel of the offspring Eve. This is a prophesy of the victory, by striking at the head of the serpent, of the offspring of Eve over the offspring of the serpent who, being on its belly (v. 14), can reach only to the heel. The strike to the head will be lethal; the strike to the heel will not be.

Some ancient Jewish rabbis interpreted Gen. 3:15 in a Messianic sense, that is, they interpreted the seed of the woman as the Jewish community in the days of “King Messiah.” Irenaeus interpreted the seed of Eve to be Christ. Medieval Roman Catholics interpreted the “woman” to be the Virgin Mary. Luther accepted that interpretation by the medieval Roman Catholics. Calvin interpreted the passage to be a promise to the body of Christ (with its head being Christ) of victory over the devil. Most modern scholars, however, are much less imaginative and interpret the verse in the very simple and straightforward manner given above.

The Apostle Paul, in Romans 5:12-21, uses the story in the third chapter of Genesis to reinforce his teaching that all men are guilty of sin and in need of justification through faith in Christ. The fact that the story in Genesis 3 does not describe an historic event in no way detracts from the fact that we have all sinned and are in need of redemption.