Is evolutionary theory a test?

[harvey1]

I know some Christians see evolutionary theory as a test, but most see it as a test for someone to reject. I see it as a test for someone to believe and still hold onto their faith. Here's a scripture which says it as such:

"I said in my heart, 'Concerning the estate of the sons of men, God tests them that they may see that they themselves are beasts [i.e., part of the animal kingdom]". Eccl. 3:18

So, there it is right out of the Bible. God is testing humanity with evolutionary theory. Not that we should reject it, but rather the test is seeing that we are integrally part of the animal kingdom. And, here according to Ecclesiastes, is the duty of humanity after having this knowledge:

"Let us hear the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole duty of [humanity]. For God will bring every work into judgement. Including every secret thing. Whether it is good or whether it is evil." Eccl. 12:13-14

[nikolayevich]

"I said in my heart, 'Concerning the estate of the sons of men, God tests them that they may see that they themselves are beasts [i.e., part of the animal kingdom]". Eccl. 3:18

Your eisegesis here is questionable. You must work within the context of scriptural passages to expound them. There are clues. The best way to explain it is to say that you need to isolate idioms- hebraisms, euphemisms, colloquialisms, etc. Once you have determined these you will generally find the answer is less cryptic and confusing (as in the case of God alluding to evolution).

So, what is the idiom of note here?

"Sons of men". Easton's Bible dictionary describes sons of men this way:
(1.) Denotes mankind generally, with special reference to their weakness and
frailty (Job 25:6; Ps. 8:4; 144:3; 146:3; Isa. 51:12, etc.).

It is important to note the contrast between "Sons of Men" and "Sons of God". Easton's Bible dictionary describes the latter this way:
The plural, "sons of God," is used (Gen. 6:2, 4) to denote the pious descendants
of Seth. In Job 1:6; 38:7 this name is applied to the angels. Hosea uses the
phrase (1:10) to designate the gracious relation in which men stand to God. In
the New Testament this phrase frequently denotes the relation into which we are
brought to God by adoption (Rom. 8:14, 19; 2 Cor. 6:18; Gal. 4:5, 6; Phil. 2:15;
1 John 3:1, 2).

By understanding these two titles [especially when in the plural], we see that the former ("sons of men") is used to describe those not in fellowship with God, and the latter ("sons of God") is used to describe those who are.

There are Biblical passages in which God tests unbelievers and those where God tests believers.

So then, let's look at the verse again, this time with a limited idiomatic understanding of one small part of the passage...
"I said in my heart, 'Concerning the estate of the sons of men, God tests them that they may see that they themselves are beasts'"

So the first thing to gather is that God is not here testing Christians on evolution. That is an interpolation which is uninvited by the text. In addition, the verse which you have left out is made quite conspicuous by its illumination of this one.

The very next verse says, "For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other." Ecclesiastes 3:19a

The test is to show that men are as the animals... What befalls all beasts man cannot on his own escape.

So in answer to the question, "Is evolutionary theory a test?"

Given the context in which the question has been posed, no.

[harvey1]

So the first thing to gather is that God is not here testing Christians on evolution. That is an interpolation which is uninvited by the text. In addition, the verse which you have left out is made quite conspicuous by its illumination of this one. The very next verse says, "For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other." Ecclesiastes 3:19a The test is to show that men are as the animals... What befalls all beasts man cannot on his own escape. So in answer to the question, "Is evolutionary theory a test?" Given the context in which the question has been posed, no.

However, this is not what Ecclesiastes said in Hebrew, nor is it what they could have said. They could have used 'like' in Hebrew which would say that men are like beasts, there are certainly Hebrew words for 'like' which would have made this interpretation clear. For example, the Hebrew word "damah" could have been used:

"I am like a desert owl, like an owl among the ruins." (Ps. 102:6)

"My lover is like a gazelle or a young stag. Look! There he stands behind our wall, gazing through the windows, peering through the lattice." (Song of Solomon 2:9)

"Until the day breaks and the shadows flee, turn, my lover, and be like a gazelle or like a young stag on the rugged hills. (Song of Solomon 2:17)

"Come away, my lover, and be like a gazelle or like a young stag on the spice-laden mountains." (Song of Solomon 8:14)

The last quotes are especially fitting because Solomon is said traditionally to have written both Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon, so why didn't the writer use 'damah' as he did in Song? Hmm...

In addition, the word for 'tests' is Hebrew 'barah' which to prove, to polish, make shining. Hence, it is clear that this knowledge of humanity being actual beasts, is a test for humanity (as you said, not just for the people who are aligned with God in mind and heart).

As to your counterargument about verse 19, I think you have it wrong. Ecclesiastes sees common traits in beasts and men, and therefore being the wise owl that he was, he was quick to see evolutionary theory as true. You see, he recognized that if you have the same returning place, then by the use of symmetry it means that you have a common origin, hence you are the same. I know you would prefer to see evolutionary theory spelled out in capital letters, but it's not necessary - he came to the same conclusion and stated it as a matter of brute fact.

Why is it, though, that many people will say to believe the Bible until it is that the Bible supports evolution, then they are quick to deny the Bible? Is the test God provides from evolutionary theory so powerful that even Christians are not willing to face it? I think the answer to that question is yes.

[otseng]

I know some Christians see evolutionary theory as a test, but most see it as a test for someone to reject. I see it as a test for someone to believe and still hold onto their faith.

I do not believe that the evolutionary theory and the Bible are mutually exclusive. There is no need to hold on to one and reject the other.

When one talks about evolution, it encompasses many things. Many things in the theory of evolution are compatible with the Bible whereas some things might not be construed as compatible with a literal reading of the Bible.

I do not see the issue as an either/or scenario. For me, I can readily accept things in the ToE and still hold onto a literal reading of the Bible. For example, microevolution for me is a fact. I do not dispute that and I believe it explains many living things. Whereas, I do not accept common descent, and I believe the scientific support for it is shaky.

So, I do not believe that the theory of evolution is a test of one's faith.

[harvey1]

So, I do not believe that the theory of evolution is a test of one's faith.

Well, the theory of evolution is a theory of common descent among all life on the planet. Natural selection is seen by most scientists as the driving mechanism which both causes evolution and design in life's diversity. Natural selection as a mechanism is inconsistent with most forms of supernaturalism.

I say most supernaturalisms since my particular brand of supernaturalism is not ruled out by natural selection. My view, by the way, happens to be the correct biblical view (all humility aside ).

The biblical view of creation is actually pretty straightforward:

"Let all the earth fear the LORD ; let all the people of the world revere him. For he spoke, and it came to be; he commanded, and it stood firm." (Psalm 33:8-9).

In other words, all God has to do is speak and it is done. The same is true for each sunrise and sunset:

"The Mighty One, God, the LORD , speaks and summons the earth from the rising of the sun to the place where it sets." (Psalm 50:1).

In other words, God's actions for the natural rising and the setting of the sun are also dictated by God's decree, or command. Once God has spoken, the actions of the world will conform to those requirements in a natural manner, and we'll see God's word completed. Hence, it really is irrelevant how nature conforms to God's commands, all that matters is that it does.

But, Jesus as I mentioned in another post, is more specific on how God creates in the parable of the sower (Matt.13, Mark 4, Luke 8). As the ultimate sower, God uses natural selection (Matt 13:4-8) to spread the word (Mark 4:14). As we know from Psalms 33, that word is what creates the world, and therefore, the word of God (that creates) is being spread through natural selection. How plain can it be?

The overall commandment is followed because they are direct commandments to earth (Gen. 1:11-12, 24). These are the commands given by God to earth that are the decrees that earth must follow. The details of the creation occurs as Jesus said (i.e., through natural selection).

But, creation isn't finished yet. God has decreed a New Heavens and New Earth (Isaiah 65:17). It has already been decreed, but there is a time lag in producing the new heavens, which is now underway in its development (as the parable of the sower is meant to convey). Natural selection is God's preferred means to create. So, common descent is part of God's handiwork.

[nikolayevich]

So the first thing to gather is that God is not here testing Christians on evolution. That is an interpolation which is uninvited by the text. In addition, the verse which you have left out is made quite conspicuous by its illumination of this one. The very next verse says, "For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other." Ecclesiastes 3:19a The test is to show that men are as the animals... What befalls all beasts man cannot on his own escape. So in answer to the question, "Is evolutionary theory a test?" Given the context in which the question has been posed, no.

However, this is not what Ecclesiastes said in Hebrew, nor is it what they could have said.

Since the thrust of what I am describing is that the verse and surrounding passage depict similar fates of man and beast, I believe it is what the Hebrew says. Using the second verse to enlarge the first, I explained what the verses say together. In expounding, one must use words to convey meaning in a way which the reader may have not noticed in the original text. That is the point, although it should never be ad hoc but rather based on holistic rather than reductionist examination. Therefore, whether "as" or "like" was actually used would not change the way animal/beast was intended to be understood. I could have as easily said, the verse says men are animals, in the following way, then read the second part of the passage. Any way you look at it, there is a literary vantage point given which describes that men (remember not just any men but "sons of men") are viewed by God as having the same condition as animals. Do you not acknowledge the distinction shown within the text itself of "sons of men" and "sons of God"? You ignore the main points and jump all over a simple conjunction.

Moreover, you go to great length to suggest that my review is false on the basis of this conjunction being added, but then proceed to continue your extravagant interpolation of Evolution as what is really the intended meaning. I think you must lose even evolutionists on this one. As much as they would like to find evidence of evolution pointed to by Biblical texts (to show Christians of course), I think that if we read as mentioned, surrounding and supporting passages, the point is missed.

I know you would prefer to see evolutionary theory spelled out in capital letters, but it's not necessary.

You're saying that the passage can't betray a simple concept such as "like" but it can be seen that "evolution" is the heart of the matter?

With respect, if I use your own hermeneutic style (as used above), it only makes your assertion more difficult to come by.

[harvey1]

Do you not acknowledge the distinction shown within the text itself of "sons of men" and "sons of God"? You ignore the main points and jump all over a simple conjunction.

Sons of God was also used to address angels - not just Israel. The distinction, "sons of men" is typically used to address all of humanity.

Since the thrust of what I am describing is that the verse and surrounding passage depict similar fates of man and beast, I believe it is what the Hebrew says. Using the second verse to enlarge the first, I explained what the verses say together. In expounding, one must use words to convey meaning in a way which the reader may have not noticed in the original text. That is the point, although it should never be ad hoc but rather based on holistic rather than reductionist examination. Therefore, whether "as" or "like" was actually used would not change the way animal/beast was intended to be understood. I could have as easily said, the verse says men are animals, in the following way, then read the second part of the passage. Any way you look at it, there is a literary vantage point given which describes that men (remember not just any men but "sons of men") are viewed by God as having the same condition as animals.

Well, you're adding words to a wise man's collection of words. Here's what Eccl.12:10-12 says about that:

"The Teacher searched to find just the right words, and what he wrote was upright and true. The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails-given by one Shepherd. Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them."

But, beyond that forewarning by Eccl. 12, if verse 19 requires for us to add a word to verse 18, then this foils the meaning of verse 18. Verse 18 says:

"I said in mine heart concerning the estate [Hebrew "Dibrah": cause or reason] of the sons of men, that God might manifest [Hebrew "Barar": test or purify] them, and that they might see [Hebrew "Ra'ah": perceive or discern] that they themselves are beasts."

Notice that Ecclesiastes is concerned about the cause or reason of the sons of men (which is a general reference to humanity), and that he wished for the sons of men to see that they are beasts. Verse 19:

"For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other. Yea, they have all one breath, so that man hath no preeminence above a beast, for all is vanity." (Eccl. 3:19)

Ecclesiastes believed that seeing the vanity of life made one wise about what the important matters are:

"'Meaningless! Meaningless!' says the Teacher. 'Everything is meaningless!' The Conclusion of the Matter. Not only was the Teacher wise, but also he imparted knowledge to the people... Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil. " (Eccl. 12:8-14)

In other words, everything is vanity, including the direct cause or direct reason of humanity. We are beasts, and the truth is that this is a vanity. As the apostle Paul said later:

"For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope" Rom. 8:20

Evolution brings about a kind of meaninglessness to life, and this is what God wishes to test humanity. Not for humans to lose hope, but rather that he can bring humanity to hope because as Ecclesiates said, you cannot live a hopeless life. By understanding the nature of the universe, a universe made subject to vanity, we could come to understand the true importance of life - the meaning of life, and thereby come to worship God in spirit and truth. You see, it is perhaps the central reason that God used evolutionary processes.

I think many Christians believe the world will come to an end soon and supernatural thing after supernatural thing will happen which will make life meaningful, but God knows that this is not what will bring meaning to human life. What brings meaning to human life is realizing that you have a choice to live a meaningless life (vanity of vanities), or by choice to seek meaning in a meaningless world, and this brings a fuller meaning to life - one in which you consciously choose to live and not because there is some creationist logic that absolutely forces you to do so.

In other words, evolutionary theory is a blessing in disguise.