Questo articolo è disponibile anche in:
Italian 
English
Question
Dear Father,
My name is Lorenzo. First, let me thank you for your dedication and care in spreading Christian values. I would like to ask you something about the Creation. Everything started from God, who created the world – or at least, He ordered to make the world evolve according to some specific rules which are known as “physical laws”. Then, He created animals and mankind. Sin wasn’t created by God, but it is a free choice made by mankind. So far, so good.
My problem lies in the impossibility to accept that the entire mankind comes just from two people (Adam and Eve). The evolution theory demonstrated that in the past men’s intellect was much less developed than now, as well as their bodies. If we originated from the same ancestors as the chimpanzees, as science claims, a significant ontological leap would be required to explain when was the human soul infused into mankind.
Regarding the Creation, I will bring you two facts:
- Babylonian had a very similar tale about Creation; the exiled Hebrews in Babylon were certainly inspired by God, but probably also influenced by Babylonian tales (this refers to the period when the first part of the Book of Genesis was written)
- The facts narrated in the Book of Genesis are etiological, which means that they provide answers to the “why” more than to tell the “how”. They do not focus on the historical event, instead, they teach something about fundamental principles of existence.
How can I rationally believe that we come from just two people? And how is it possible to combine this with the evolution theory according to the scientific method? While I don’t doubt that the original sin is a specific event, I still have these questions unresolved and I hope you can help me clarifying them.
Thank you, I will remember you to the Lord and I wish you to have a good day.
Lorenzo
Answer
Dear Lorenzo,
1. You are taking for granted two things: that the tales narrated in the Book of Genesis come from legends made up during the Babylonian exile, and that the Holy Bible’s purpose is to answer to the why, rather than to the how. Now, all the experts (including theologists, historians, paleontologists and archeologists) agree that the Pentateuch -which is the group of the first five books in the Old Testament- was written sometime in 8th century B.C.. Moreover we should remember that before being transferred into written witnesses, those tales were transmitted orally in what is called culture of memory. Instead, the exile in Babylon happened in the 6th century B.C. only.
2. There is something more than the ontological inconsistency in what you affirm. First of all, the Assyrian-Babylonian were Semitic. So, it is not strange to find some similarities between their narration of the Creation and the Book of Genesis, such as that the firmament is divided into inferior and superior waters. Nevertheless, despite a few similarities, there are numerous differences as well.
3. The Assyrian-Babylonian creation epic has been transmitted to us through the so-called Seven Tables of Creation, or Enuma Elish wooden tables. In the next two paragraphs I will present the main differences between the Hebrew and Assyirian/Babylonian epic of creation.
4. According to the Assyrians-Babylonians, the creation of the world arises from the action of a multitude of gods, and there’s not such a thing as a creation event. One of those gods, Marduk, is considered to be the one who created grains, plants, grass, and menkind. New gods were created, who immediately rebelled and fought with the others in a childish and unworthy of divinity way (ex. Tiamat and Marduk). On the other side, in the Book of Genesis the description of the events of creation is all about sublimity, simplicity, and dignity! God acts according to His nature, He doesn’t have to make efforts, or to fight. He speaks and everything is done.
5. In the Assyrian-Babylonian description of the beginning of the world, nothing is said about the creation of light; also the creation of mankind is ridiculous and unnatural: Marduk, with the help of Arouru, created mankind so that the gods could have a dwelling, and be pleased. In none of the boards we can find concepts such as the Creation Week, the Divine Rest, and the Creation of the First Human Couple. Nowhere in the wooden tables the Original Sin is mentioned, nor that Eve was tempted by the snake. The Assyrian-Babylonian epic of creation has so many differences compared to the Hebrew one, that none of their legends can explain the content of the Book of Genesis. For this reason the Jerusalem Bible does not even mention the Assyrian-Babylonian boards in its introduction to Genesis.
6. You also say that the holy text aims to give answers to the why, rather than to the how. This distinction is not always true, since some truths are explicit, and they are not just matters of style. In 1896, in the eminent Revue Biblique, the Dominican father Marie Joseph Lagrange, founder of the Ècole Biblique in Jerusalem, stated that we should distinguish between the concept of revelation and the one of inspiration. Everything that has been written in the Holy Bible is inspired, but not everything is revealed. God made use of an author who had the typical culture of his time, and used literature genres proper of that period. Among those genres, we can list the narration of early history, which is a mix of events, legends, and popular traditions. Therefore, we need to distinguish between the basis of truth, i.e. substance granted by divine truthfulness, and the circumstances that should be considered as metaphors, or Hebrews allegories, arising from the oral tradition (Revue Biblique, 1896, pp. 507-117).
7. In this regard, the Catholic Church Catechism states: “In Sacred Scripture, God speaks to man in a human way. To interpret Scripture correctly, the reader must be attentive to what the human authors truly wanted to affirm, and to what God wanted to reveal to us by their words” (CCC 109). Moreover, “In order to discover the sacred authors’ intention, the reader must take into account the conditions of their time and culture, the literary genres in use at that time, and the modes of feeling, speaking and narrating then current. For the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression” (CCC 110).
8. Again, the Catholic Church Catechism mentions “the harmony between the First Couple and all creation” (CCC 376). By First Couple, the Holy Bible does not use symbolic language. It is a truth that is revealed, taught. The same applies for the Original Sin: “The account of the fall in the Book of Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man (Gaudium et spes, 13). Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.” (CCC 390). Therefore, it is not just about the why, since some of the statements refer to realities, to events occurred.
9. Getting to your question, I might ask you: what’s the problem in believing that we came from the same single couple? I see none. We do not have sure evidence to state that we all came from the same single couple. However, we believe that it is true by faith. Believing in that faith’s truth is not absurd, even more if we consider that we do not have sure evidence about the fact that we do not come from the same single couple either.
10. This is a truth of faith that is not against scientific evidence, because science does not deal with the topic of the genesis of humankind in an apodictic way. It may be against scientific “hypothesis”. But hypotheses, although they may seem highly plausibles, are not yet totally unquestionable truths.
I thank you for your prayers, which are precious to me.
I also thank you for the question, I remember you to the Lord and I bless you.
Padre Angelo
Translated by Giulia Leo
Proof edited by Sara Bellei