Ron Cowie: "Theistic Evolution" (2021) - 018

← back ← Index	File:018.oga	forward →

+/- Note:

Please comment and engage in respectful discussion below. By all means link elsewhere in the wiki.
This page, with comments, is included in the printer-friendly page R Cowie "Theistic Evolution" 2021 responses.
If you do not have an account to edit the wiki, or need help to do so, send us an email. The address is under "Help needed!" on the Main Page.

---

from Sundaes —
"Six days could be anything"? No, six days is six days in the metaphorical week.
Adam was not the first human, he's an archetype.
"Very good" includes mortal beings? Of course it does.
"There was no literal serpent"? True, serpents don't talk.
It makes no difference if Moses did or didn't write Genesis.

---

from Bruce —

1. Correction: "created" does not mean "evolved". Evolution is one means of creation.
2. Correction: six days are a working week in the Old Testament, leading up to a day of rest on the Sabbath. It is obvious what they represent.
3. Correction: given that "adam" means "human", it is meaningless to say "Adam was not the first human."
4. Correction: When we learn what "Adam" means, we understand that "Adam" is created mortal.
5. Correction: "Very good" in the Bible is not the pseudo-theological term it has become for some people. (It is obvious what Genesis 1:31 means, but you might be interested to click on that link and see if John Thomas and L G Sargent would agree with Ron!)
6. Correction: "dying thou shalt die" isn't just anything.
7. Correction: There is a serpent in the narrative which is either miraculously endowed or impossible: this is one of the indications of how a serious and respectful reading of the text will proceed. The heading of this slide is wrong.
8. Comment: The authorship of Genesis has nothing to do with "Theistic Evolution", but is a matter of interest to all Christadelphians, including those referred to by brother Ron as "the TE".

---

from Ken Gilmore —

• Cowie again offers his misinterpretation of what ECs maintain
• “Created means evolved” Cowie errs by conflating special creation with creation. Evolutionary creationists accept what mainstream scientists have shown; the origin of species is evolutionary. Therefore, the mechanism of creation God used was an evolutionary one.
• ”Six days could mean anything”. Incorrect. The days are literal days, but could be days of revelation / fiat proclamation / literary framework / days of inauguration of creation as divine temple
• ”Adam was not first human” – the evidence shows anatomically modern humans first appeared around 300,000 years ago. Adam was the first human to whom God revealed himself
• “Adam was created mortal and prone to sin” This is correct, and no less a person than former CMag editor LGS stated Adam was created mortal. (This reflects a theological peculiarity of the fundamentalist community of which Cowie is a part which preaches a Christadelphian form of Original Sin.)

• “Dying shalt thou die” – infinitive absolute. Functions idiomatically to emphasise certainty of event.
  • NRSV – for in the day that you eat it you shall die
  • NASB95 – for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die
  • NIV – for when you eat from it you will certainly die
  • LEB – for in the day that you eat from it you shall surely due
  • Tanakh – for as soon as you eat of it, you shall die
  • NET – for when you eat from it you will surely die
  • CEV – if you eat any fruit from that tree, you will die before the day is over.
  • CEB - because on the day you eat from it, you will die!

• No evidence that this verse means a change of nature post-sin! Note Hamilton’s comment: ‘Yet another alternative is that 2:17 means “on the day you eat of it you will become mortal.” This approach assumes that God created man immortal, a fact that is not explicitly stated in Genesis and seems contrary to 1 Tim. 6:16, which states that deity alone has immortality. Indeed, in no OT passage does the phrase môṯ tāmûṯ mean “to become mortal.”’ - Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1–17, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990), 173.

• You shall die is the same Hebrew double verb construction as is translated “freely eat” in verse 16, and here the meaning is “you will certainly die,” “you will die for sure.” The emphatic statement may also be translated “you will die on the day you eat it.” - William David Reyburn and Euan McG. Fry, A Handbook on Genesis, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1998), 70.

• Likewise, there is not the slightest indication that man was already immortal before his Fall; on the contrary, it is clear from 3:24 that he could not have achieved this condition save by an additional act on his part, to wit, by stretching forth his hand and eating of the fruit of the tree of life. The natural meaning of the words requires us to understand them in accordance with what I have stated above: when you eat of the tree of knowledge it shall be decreed against you never to be able to eat of the tree of life, that is, you will be unable to achieve eternal life and you will be compelled one day to succumb to death; you shall die, in actual fact - U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part I, From Adam to Noah (Genesis I–VI 8), trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University, 1998), 125.

• Second, we need to examine the uses of môṯ tāmûṯ in Scripture. In addition to its appearance in 2:17 and 3:4, it appears twelve other times in the OT (Gen. 20:7; 1 Sam. 14:44; 22:16; 1 K. 2:37, 42; 2 K. 1:4, 6, 16; Jer. 26:8; Ezek. 3:18; 33:8, 14 [All these can be found at "thou shalt surely die", with a variety of comments. –B.P.]). All of these passages deal with either a punishment for sins or an untimely death that is the result of punishment. — Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1–17, The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990), 173–174.

• Mortality of Adam implied by the existence of the Tree of Life, “text presupposes a belief that man, created from perishable matter, was mortal from the outset but that he had within his grasp the possibility of immortality” Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis, The JPS Torah Commentary (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), p 18-19

• Sarna notes of v17 “As noted in the Comment to verse 9, man was mortal from the beginning. Logically, therefore, the transgression should incur immediate capital punishment, not mortality as opposed to immortality. But man and woman did not die at once, and it is not stated that God rescinded the death penalty. For these reasons, “you shall die” must here mean being deprived of the possibility of rejuvenation by means of the “tree of life,” as existed hitherto—in other words, inevitable expulsion from the garden. Ibid, p21

• ”Moses didn’t write Genesis” – attempt to poison the discussion by introducing (to fundamentalists) controversial source-critical issues when the question is primarily one of exegesis.

• It is theoretically possible to believe every word in Genesis was written by Moses but maintain a non-literal interpretation of the creation narratives.