www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Evolution and Creation

Iam not sure what the Orthodox church teaches regarding Adam and Eve, but here is what the Catholic Church definitively treaches regarding Adam and Eve and origins of human life:

Humani Generis
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XII
AUGUST 12, 1950

"(#37). When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains either that after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is in no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own."

Again, this is a religious history, not a scientific textbook or HS history text.

It has also been argued that the construction of the differing geneologies in both the OT and the NT are intended to serve as a literary tool to teach something specific in the context of the whole narrative. The figures are still historical, but the construction of the history is framed in such a way to serve as a device for the unfolding story.

I am willing to acknowledge the use of literary devices, but I guess I am not willing to go so far as to reduce the biblical accounts to having "strands of reality" covered in myth.

I still trust their event character as a matter of faith, while acknowledging that I canot read them as a modern would. I need to situate myself fully in the canonical context of the story and read it as a faithful Israelite would do so as well as in the light of the Gospel.

I already addressed the genealogy issues, so I will not repeat myself. As to "what we know of the age of the earth", I guess I am not so assured of the implicit reliability of scientific knowledge. Theories are posited, alternate theories are proposed, some are in vogue at one moment and other opposing ones the next... and besides, if the world was created as a "mature" world, how could we possibly properly measure its age and development?

I realize that. I would say that I am arguing that certain aspects of your position undermine, if you follow them to their logical conclusion, core elements of an Orthodox and Catholic theology of redemption. By mythologizing Adam and Eve and denying them as literal, historical figures, it undermines the Christian worldview of the mission of Christ at its roots.

the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which through generation is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.

Needless to say I reject this as well.

Andrew, I have to agree with you. And, if it is in fact infallible teaching of the Latin Church that the actual sin of Adam is passed on to us as if it were our own, then I have to say that this is evidence that the Latin Church has taught error. And I don't mean that to be offensive, I am just pointing out something that I think clearly is in error. All of the particular Churches are capable of teaching error, in my opinion, and probably have taught error.

Joe

CONSEQUENCES OF ADAM�S SIN

After Adam and Eve sin spread rapidly throughout the human race. They were guilty of pride and disobedience, while their son Cain committed fratricide. Cain�s descendants soon forgot about God and set about organizing their earthly existence. Cain himself �built a city�. One of his closest descendants was �the father of those who dwell in tents and have cattle�; another was �the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe�; yet another was �the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron� (Gen.4:17-22). The establishment of cities, cattle-breeding, music and other arts were thus passed onto humankind by Cain�s descendants as a surrogate of the lost happiness of Paradise.

The consequences of the Fall spread to the whole of the human race. This is elucidated by St Paul: �Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned� (Rom.5:12). This text, which formed the Church�s basis of her teaching on �original sin�, may be understood in a number of ways: the Greek words ef� ho pantes hemarton may be translated not only as �because all men sinned� but also �in whom [that is, in Adam] all men sinned�. Different readings of the text may produce different understandings of what �original sin� means.

If we accept the first translation, this means that each person is responsible for his own sins, and not for Adam�s transgression. Here, Adam is merely the prototype of all future sinners, each of whom, in repeating Adam�s sin, bears responsibility only for his own sins. Adam�s sin is not the cause of our sinfulness; we do not participate in his sin and his guilt cannot be passed onto us.

However, if we read the text to mean �in whom all have sinned�, this can be understood as the passing on of Adam�s sin to all future generations of people, since human nature has been infected by sin in general. The disposition toward sin became hereditary and responsibility for turning away from God sin universal. As St Cyril of Alexandria states, human nature itself has �fallen ill with sin�; thus we all share Adam�s sin as we all share his nature. St Macarius of Egypt speaks of �a leaven of evil passions� and of �secret impurity and the abiding darkness of passions�, which have entered into our nature in spite of our original purity. Sin has become so deeply rooted in human nature that not a single descendant of Adam has been spared from a hereditary predisposition toward sin.

The Old Testament writers had a vivid sense of their inherited sinfulness: �Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me� (Ps.51:7). They believed that God �visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation� (Ex.20:5). In the latter words reference is not made to innocent children but to those whose own sinfulness is rooted in the sins of their forefathers.

From a rational point of view, to punish the entire human race for Adam�s sin is an injustice. But not a single Christian dogma has ever been fully comprehended by reason. Religion within the bounds of reason is not religion but naked rationalism, for religion is supra-rational, supra-logical. The doctrine of original sin is disclosed in the light of divine revelation and acquires meaning with reference to the dogma of the atonement of humanity through the New Adam, Christ: �...As one man�s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man�s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. For as by one man�s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man�s obedience many will be made righteous... so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord� (Rom.5:18-21).

Seems to me that Bishop Hilarion seems to think Adam and Eve are a bit more than mere symbols....Mary

http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/10/1.aspx#25

Dear Friends,

With regard to the above papal teaching on Original Sin quoted by dstan, in actual fact, the Pope is NOT saying that the actual sin of Adam is communicated to us.

He is saying that original sin "proceeds" from the actual sin of Adam - that is not the same thing as saying that the actual sin of Adam is passed down to us.

In fact, it is true that Original Sin proceeds from the actual sin of Adam i.e. concupiscence, death etc.

Alex

And, if it is in fact infallible teaching of the Latin Church that the actual sin of Adam is passed on to us as if it were our own, then I have to say that this is evidence that the Latin Church has taught error. And I don't mean that to be offensive, I am just pointing out something that I think clearly is in error. All of the particular Churches are capable of teaching error, in my opinion, and probably have taught error.