Evolution, if taken properly, literally puts a question on a lot of traditional christian beliefs and obviously that is a hard thing to square. It introduces death biologically rather than because of sin. And pretty much negates a core belief that death came through sin. It proves that mankind didn't come from a single couple. It undermines man being special. It falsifies the literal creation account and pretty much all of the genesis story and its various interpretations.
Wow, so, evolution "proves" such things? That's a pretty incredible assertion. Not to mention an extraordinary level of faith in mortal man and his crude tools to discern the things of an all-powerful God, for Whom there are NO limits!
Nonetheless, Neo's above quote is an honest answer to what the reality of the asserted truth of the evolution of man (from earlier and simpler life forms) would HAVE to mean for Scripture - IF it were true - it would mean that much of Scripture is untrue and NOT "God-breathed!" And it's one of the biggest reasons why I reject it. Of course, I would not deny that ANIMAL death occurred before sin entered the world.
And so, Neo, WHY (as I assume you believe) does mankind even need a Savior, and how and when did sin enter the world? Also, clearly, IF true, God was either not in control of the Bible's writing OR that did not even matter to Him. AND, if at least some, or even most, parts of the Bible are untrue (now, I'm speaking of its original autographs), then this means God has allowed copious amounts of lies and fiction to be interwoven into His Holy Word. And if THAT is true, how do you know which parts are true and which parts are not? Obviously, you couldn't! And so, what you end up with WOULD be a God of confusion. Of course, some would say God evolved two specific creatures to a point and then suddenly imbued them with souls and thus they became "man." OR only Adam evolved and Eve did, in fact, come miraculously from Adam. Still, Scripturally, you have many problems with reading key parts of Adam & Eve's story, only symbollically. And, IF the Creation accounts (and other Scriptural portions) are actually true but mostly only in an allegorical way...well, we're pretty much right back to it being worthless to us - at least as far as their being communicated in a way we can truly and correctly understand, and in such a way that we don't run into the myriad of dangers related to their misinterpretation and misapplication. We could easily interpret them in a thousand inaccurate, if creative, ways.
But does the Lord Who created on a scale so amazingly detailed, comprehensively and necessarily interactive, down to the molecular level, throughout vast cosmos run by laws of such great precision, Who came to DIE for His Word - does such a God treat His Word so casually, so irresponsibly, so indifferently, with all of the chaos such a twisted tapestry of uncertainty that would create, so clearly knowing the evil that would clearly arise from such distortions? It's one thing for man to prolifically do evil, merely due to sinful hearts and minds, but it's quite another for Him to deliberately allow us to be so deceived by allowing His Holy Word to become so incredibly corrupted, that abundant and terrible lies and distortions are as well blended as the last smoothie I tried. Truly, drunks are more cautious about where they throw empty beer bottles from moving cars, than what Neo is asserting has happened concerning the inaccuracy and the supposed, perverse devastation of God's Word.
It's a certainty that whatever Being created this world is obviously a fanatic about His Creation's unfathomable scale and immense layers of minute details! But then we're to believe He got exceptionally sloppy with Its "instruction manual?"
Such a God is anything but personal and reliable - no, instead he's a deist god whom creates his universe and sits back to watch the carnage, his creatures forever only certain of his unreliability, like kids watching ants torture a grasshopper. Not too much love there, eh? And HOW could we EVER trust such a god?
