The two aren't mutually exclusive. God created man (Gen. 1:27) by shaping him (Gen. 2:7). The word usually transalted as "shape" or "form" is the same word used to describe the act of shaping a pot out of clay. Like a potter shapes a lump of clay into a pot, God shaped slime into man.
I think these things are directly impacted by the presentation of what T.O.E states: that woman was not originally sourced from a man.
Sorry, but that's just not true. It's true that the TEO states that the first man was born of a subhuman mother. However, there is no scientific way to rule out the possibility that God then, with a miracle, created the first fully human woman so that he would not have to mate with subhumans.
So, if that is accepted, then all other aspects of the Bible are reduced to myth, not just 'symbols and allegories'.
I don't see how that follows. Just because one part of the Bible is allegory and symbol does not mean that all of it is such. Furthermore, just because something is symbolic or allegorical does not mean it is untrue or not to be taken seriously.
For example, sin is not symbolic. It can't be. It's metaphysical, not physical, and symbols are by definition physical things. The whole point of the Garden of Eden story is to teach about sin and the consequences of sin, original and actual. Just because the story contains symbolic or allegorical elemnts (I reject the claim that it is entirely allegorical) does not make the reality of original sin and its consequences, spiritual death among other things, any less real.
But all that said, I found your selection, theologically, of 'all that matters' very odd. You coupled the word rational with the concept of free will - and you 'reasoned' that 'theologically', that was 'all that mattered'.
You misunderstand me. I do not believe rationality and free will are the only things of theolgoical importance. My point is that they are all that is necessary for there to be sin. Why? Because sin occurs when a rational creature freely chooses to reject the will of God. Okay, so you need one other thing for sin: God and His will. So the only things necessary for sin to exist are 1)rationality 2) free will and 3) God with a will. Okay, okay. YOu need a fourth thing: the willingness of a free creature to reject the will of God.
I was pointing out things necessary for the existence of since because you were claiming that evolution made the concept of sin impossible. I believe I have disproved that claim.
Now, 4 years after the big change, I'm beginning to have very grave doubts about my ability to defend the central theme of 'free will'.
Why? It is a central theme of the scriptures, as well as the Church Fathers.
Calvinists reading this would say 'duh', but I've not been able to fully leap into that camp, either.
Good. Calvinism is a vile, unscriptural heresy with a perverse view of God. I would rather burn in hell than worship the god of Calvin. Thankfully, the one true God is not Calvin's god.
Let me ask you a question ... do you know how to make God feel loved? (and I ask your patience, for all this does connect quite thoroughly to evolution - for in the end, evolution - sex - God/Christ - sex are intracately linked).
By giving Him glory.
"Good. Calvinism is a vile, unscriptural heresy with a perverse view of God."
So I keep hearing. But somehow, what Calvinists say, even if I don't like how they say it, is making more and more sense to me. Just why is this?
It also looks like somehow you are relying on something your average scientist would say is unacceptable: that since we can't 'disprove' Eve was outright created by a miracle, the possibility it happened is acceptable ... on a rational basis. By this logic, I.D. is fully acceptable, scientifically, yes?
You are leaving room for 'miracles'. Within scientific rationalism, I don't see this as a rule - the possibility of miracles is expressly excluded. So, I confess, I am a bit confused by what you are meaning here:
"Sorry, but that's just not true. It's true that the TEO states that the first man was born of a subhuman mother. However, there is no scientific way to rule out the possibility that God then, with a miracle, created the first fully human woman so that he would not have to mate with subhumans."