Adam, Eve, History, Truth (5)

http://www.getreligion.org/2011/08/fringe-catholics-in-the-news-again/

The story (above) about "Fringe Catholics who believe in geocentric universe" was timely in light of this week's reflections. In the article, from a blog on how religion is covered in media (and covered poorly!), the author is pointing out that the Roman Catholic Church has a right to identify its membership. What was interesting to me, was this group, be it Roman or not, is advocating that the earth is the center of the universe. This view point is, of course, the Bible's version, and in days gone by that debate was the decisive one between "church" and "science." It is noteworthy, that currently we hear little about Evangelicals being fired from schools for teaching that the sun revolves around the earth. Why is that?

The teaching of evolution is a much more recent phenomenon. Most Christians do not know history. Many pride themselves on that fact. Ignorance of history, however, is widespread, so I am not picking on my co-religionists here. It just means that the arguments today are not contextualized in the wider view of things which history affords. Also, the science of evolution has produced a philosophy of evolution. The two interpenetrate, but they are not the same thing. Evolution as philosophy expands far beyond the reach of science.While I am sure the processes of life do look like evolution, it is clear to me that evolution as a theory does not explain everything. There are holes in the theory. That is the nature of human explanations. I have read numerous books & blogs by any number of highly educated scientists which has illustrated the places where evolutionary theory falls short. I am also a (catholic) Christian. We have a creed which declares "I believe in God the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth." When dismissive people mock my hesitance to embrace evolution I remind them that my faith makes clear that we are NOT the result of accidental processes. There is a SOMEONE behind this whole process.

Do I think the Bible explains it all? NOPE! And I would argue that it does not try. Adam and Eve have two sons. One kills the other. The murderer, Cain, is exiled. But he makes a plea, "My punishment is too great... You have banished me from the soil and I must avoid your presence and become a restless wander on earth, anyone who meets me may kill me." So God puts a mark upon him and promises him protection. Then Cain leaves the presence of the Lord and settles east of Eden in the land of Nod.

So the obvious question, "who are these other people?" I know the popular answer is Adam and Eve had other kids. But does the text sound like that is the issue? Why would Cain not say, "I  must flee from my brothers and sisters, for they will know of my deed and avenge my brother"? IF the point of the story is to explain that every living person was from Adam and Eve, would it not make sense to spell it out? I know, earlier Eve is call the mother of all the living. I get that. What I do not get is why the story sidesteps that issue. Why is it "Cain knew his wife" but there is no explanation of who his wife is and where she came from? Why does it not say, so Cain took his sister and she became his wife?

Perhaps, the story is about sin. It is about how human nature, soiled by evil, grew worse. Maybe it illustrates that those who disobey God soon kill their brother? That right relationship with God is needed to have right relationship with humans? Maybe it is an allegory about the danger of farming (Cain) versus shepherding (Abel)? Whatever the case, as one reads these chapters it is obvious that the main point is not to explain how Adam and Eve populated the earth. I daresay it is not even a secondary or tertiary point. It is just assumed that people are there. Cain founds a city, the first city, named after his son Enoch. Where did all the folks come from? No mention is made. Perhaps we are to take a signal from that. Within a few generations we hear about copper and iron (Tubal-cain). Once again, history indicates that the iron age is not so close to the dawn of humanity. What to do with that?

If we want to  hear the word of God, then we must listen to God. It is not more faithful to claim that a mystical text is not mystical. It is not more faithful to read a mythical explanation text (so common across all cultures) and read it as something different than what it is.  It is not more faithful to make a text into a modern geology, history or science text when it is an ancient explanatory text. There is a message here in Genesis it just isn't biological. A couple of centuries ago Christians accepted that it was not a message about a flat earth, covered with a dome, sitting on columns, with all the stars, moon and sun rotating around it. We accepted it and moved on. Now we are in the painful period of dealing with another "assault" on what we "thought was the case." Christians do well to balance their defense of the faith against evolutionary philosophy with a willingness to let science be science and the texts of the Bible be what they are. I do not know if the reflections this week have been helpful for people struggling with these issues. I do know that God reigns and all will be well, someday, for those who trust Him.