Evolution and Christianity and Salvation

[snowtracks]

---

i raised this issue on a Catholic forum recently and I was surprised how little it bothered people.  I claim that Catholicism and Evolution are not compatible, based on the following: 

Consider that it is a fundamental tenant of Christianity that ALL human beings, every one alive today, MUST trace their linage back to a single man (or woman) that committed the grave sin of rejecting God.  If you think this was Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, fine - you don't believe in Evolution and you can downgrade to other discussions on the topic. However, the general consensus of science-based Christians (including Cardinal Ratzinger) is that, if you want to rationalize evolution with Christian dogma, you must assume that ONE human being (and only one), at some time in our past, was 'injected' with a soul.  This was the first human being with a soul, perhaps 50,000 years ago (or 6,000 who knows).  This soul-endowed human then rejected God in some manner, committing the first sin, and henceforth all his progeny carry that burden forward throughout all of history.  Hence the need for salvation, and Jesus and the Resurrection, and so forth.  I have talked with many Catholics on this and this is not in dispute.  This is how you rationalize evolution with Christian dogma.

So...here was my point:   If you subscribe to the above Christian rationalization of Christianity, you MUST accept the following:

---

1) There was a large population of "soulless" people
2) The one person with a soul had parents that had no souls, and perhaps siblings with no souls
3) The one person lived in a world filled with contemporary people that had no souls
4) All genetic lines EXCEPT the one with the souled person died out, so for generations, many people continued to live and be born as human beings without souls until their lines all died.

---

The above is not my opinion.  This is what you MUST believe if you rationalize Christianity and Evolution.  This is foundation, and the essence of salvation.
Am I missing something?  In many ways I respect those that are Creationists, as at least that position is logically consistent.

One thing that has bothered me with religion is not so much that it can be false, but what you MUST accept if it were true.

---

All 4 premises are false, so any conclusion would be. Adam was created with the 3'rd component, Spirit. Plants only have body;  animals have additionally, mind (exhibit soulish characteristics at mammal hierarchy). Angels and humans* being spiritual creatures have eternal life, unlike plants and animals. Animals are thus devoid of the spiritual component, which is the 'made in the image of God', could not transmute to a being with all 3 components.

* Commonality is spiritual, what is not common is Angels do not have a redemption plan, whereas, humans do which is a free will decision to elect eternal connection** or separation from God***.

** A large minority will opt for this option, approx 34 %.    Zech 13:8-9  It will come about in all the land, Declares the LORD, That two parts in it will be cut off and perish; but the third will be left in it. And I will bring the third part through the fire, Refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, and I will answer them; They are My people, and they will say, The LORD is my God.

***The description of it is in  2 Thess 1: 9: “These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power”.  Fire and brimstone are metaphors describing this experience.