Why do Christians hate the theory of evolution?

[Alithis]

We do agree (I think) that Scripture is not a book on Science. I will concede that Jesus' references to Genesis taught of a moral issue. But in my mind, this shows the value of Genesis in all that it says. God commanded all things to come into existence and it was so. I think we agree at this point. The question is now how did he do it? The Bible only reveals that he spoke it and it happened.

Could he have used the process of evolution? He could have, but we do not have substantial evidence to say that he did. Yes, we know that there have been mutations and adaptions within species, but there is absolutely no substantial evidence that supports evolution. Thus, it is a weak theory at best. Is that to say new evidence will ever appear? Absolutely not, some day real substantiated evidence may be found; I am saying it has not happened yet. Yes, there are some things that are hard to explain, but they neither prove or disprove evolution.

My point with the fossil record is to say that the Bible teaches death came into the world because of the sin of man. Again, this is supported by the Lord's acknowledgement of the Genesis account, as stated above. If man is at the tail end of the evolution process, then why did the world experienced so much death before man entered the picture? The Biblical answer must be that man was created at the same time as everything else--or at least, in the same week.

Whether math is a science or not, we do know that 0+0=0. As you stated, God may very well have spoken and caused the Big Bang Theory, but that does not fit into the biblical account of creation.

the issue of sin being the cause of death is an interesting one for sure.

 

[Bluelion]

the issue of sin being the cause of death is an interesting one for sure.

It is an interesting fact is it not

 

[chiwawa]

God commanded all things to come into existence and it was so. I think we agree at this point. The question is now how did he do it? The Bible only reveals that he spoke it and it happened.

Speaking into existence is a very open description! Therefore there is no problem believing in any way in which it happened. Which is why it is perfectly acceptable to go with the scientific consensus.

Could he have used the process of evolution? He could have, but we do not have substantial evidence to say that he did. Yes, we know that there have been mutations and adaptions [sic] within species, but there is absolutely no substantial evidence that supports evolution.

Again, there is substantial evidence for evolution. Not just because it survived to today, but because it is essential to biology. Theodosius Dobzhansky, a famous russian orthodox christian biologist even wrote an essay called "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution".

Some evidence for evolution:

- The fossil record shows species changing over time.

- Fossils of animals get more primitive as you go deeper into the ground (ie further back in time).

- Animals who are closely related in the evolutionary tree have similar body plans, and converge back in time with their common ancestor.

- Animals have "vestiges" ie organs/body parts that are of no use today, but their function can be traced back in their evolutionary past. (why do humans have tailbones?)

- Evolution is always happening. Though it takes many generations to be apparent. In animals that go through many generations quickly (like bacteria) evolution can be observed (which is why there is a new flu shot every year).


There's tons of more evidence if those arent convincing enough

My point with the fossil record is to say that the Bible teaches death came into the world because of the sin of man. Again, this is supported by the Lord's acknowledgement of the Genesis account, as stated above. If man is at the tail end of the evolution process, then why did the world experienced so much death before man entered the picture? The Biblical answer must be that man was created at the same time as everything else--or at least, in the same week.

That is the interesting point. Christians reconcile this in different ways. One way......the bible doesnt explicitly state the kind of death that came into the world at that point. Animal/plant death has existed since the beginning. If you believe Adam was eating fruit in the garden, of course there is millions of things dying when he puts that tangerine in his mouth and digests. And carnivores exist, who have carnivore teeth and carnivore claws and a carnivore appetite. Death has always happened. The kind of death that Eve brought about was the spiritual death (separation with God).

Again, this is not the only explanation that christians who believe in evolution have for death, but it is one.

 

[ThisBrotherOfHis]

Speaking into existence is a very open description! Therefore there is no problem believing in any way in which it happened. Which is why it is perfectly acceptable to go with the scientific consensus.

That's very ecumenical of you, but it doesn't work Scripturally. Throughout Genesis 1, "God said ... " and "there was ... ". The Hebrew is 'amar meaning "speak, say, utter." There is no other way to read the Hebrew other than the event happened immediately upon God's speaking. He spoke, it happened, right then and there. So there are actually huge problems believing "in any way it which it happened," because the biblical language implications are that it happened immediately.

Again, there is substantial evidence for evolution.

There is no evidence for evolution whatsoever. It is nothing more than guesswork, supposition, theory and conjecture, for which there is absolutely no compelling proof.

Not just because it survived to today, but because it is essential to biology.

Not in the least. God's speaking was essential to biology, and this all that is necessary.

Theodosius Dobzhansky, a famous russian orthodox christian biologist even wrote an essay called "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution".

He's wrong. In reality, nothing in evolution makes sense in light of the evidence.

- The fossil record shows species changing over time.

The fossil record is a confused mass of jumble, with species that supposedly lived million of years apart being found in the exact same strata. In all the fossil record, despite 150 years of desperate searching, there has been found no "missing link" -- not just between man and ape, but between any stage of the alleged "species change" that had to occur for the fish to grow legs, the reptile to grow hair, the quadruped to suddenly stand upright, etc., etc, etc.

- Fossils of animals get more primitive as you go deeper into the ground (ie further back in time).

In light of the fact that there are species allegedly living millions of years apart found side by side, as I stated above, that argument is negated.

- Animals who are closely related in the evolutionary tree have similar body plans, and converge back in time with their common ancestor.

Again, speculation with no fossil evidence.

- Animals have "vestiges" ie organs/body parts that are of no use today, but their function can be traced back in their evolutionary past. (why do humans have tailbones?)

One, humans don't have tailbones. It is the coccyx, a triangular verteabrae formation to which the ventral muscles attach, which also attach to the pelvis, forming the muscular floor of the skeletal formation. Attached to the coccyx is the coccygeus muscle. It draws the coccyx ventrally to give added support to the pelvic floor against abdominal pressure. It draws the coccyx forward after defecation. That's what the coccyx is for, and has nothing to do with a "vestigial tail." Two, virtually every "vestigial organ" you can claim is found in animals today can be shown to be a valued body part, not some useless "thing" that is hanging around the animal's body long after its usefulness departed.

- Evolution is always happening.

At the micro level, yes. No one denies that. Micro-evolution, however, does not prove macro-evolution.

Though it takes many generations to be apparent. In animals that go through many generations quickly (like bacteria) evolution can be observed (which is why there is a new flu shot every year).

Again, a virus is a virus is a virus. It didn't change species, it simply changed characteristics. As a simple entity, it can do that very quickly, sometimes in a matter of minutes. It does not happen in higher life forms. Such changes are called mutations, and virtually every one of them is fatal. Imagine for example, the alleged squirrel that "morphed" into a bat. The "mutation" of long, curved claws would have been detrimental to the squirrel's running capability, and caught on the ground by a circling hawk, the poor creature could not escape. Hawk food. End of mutation.

There's tons of more evidence if those arent convincing enough

Well, bring in the dump trucks, 'cause those convinced no one of anything.

That is the interesting point. Christians reconcile this in different ways. One way......the bible doesnt explicitly state the kind of death that came into the world at that point.

It is plain that what was meant is spiritual death, given that Adam and Eve did not die physically upon consuming the fruit.

Animal/plant death has existed since the beginning.

There is no biblical proof of that. There is no recorded death in the world until after The Fall, when Cain slew Abel.

If you believe Adam was eating fruit in the garden, of course there is millions of things dying when he puts that tangerine in his mouth and digests.

Assumption, not proof.

And carnivores exist, who have carnivore teeth and carnivore claws and a carnivore appetite. Death has always happened.

Assumption, not proof.

The kind of death that Eve brought about was the spiritual death (separation with God).

Nice to see there's something we agree on.

 

[least]

Thankyou, ThisBrotherOfHis, very well said!

However, I want to point out that while spiritual death was immediate, physical death was also a result of sin. Whether that applies to all the animals and plants is up to speculation (I speculate it did, at least for the animals). But let us visit the Scriptures to see the point:

"Because you have listened to to the voice of your wifed and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return." (Genesis 3:17-19, ESV).

Chiwawa, I do not deny mutations have occured throughout history. ThisBrotherOfHis has laid out some very compelling and logical observations and I need not repeat them. Evolution (in the sense of the Macro) is not logical. But it reminds me of a puzzle that is missing way too many peices to judge the final picture. On the surface, Evolution makes sense. But as we dig deeper with the spade of [real] science, it comes up short. And it comes up short with the Bible as well.

 

[th1bill]

Chiwawa,
There is one problem that requires a solution for the "Theory" of Evolution to stand and it is located, right here, in Texas. (Photos, the last time I looked, are searchable on the web.) The scientists have conceded that man, as we know him today, has only been walking this planet for 6 to 10 thousand years and yet there are the foot-prints of a, barefooted, modern type man inside the foot-print of a Dino.

God, in His Word, twice, places the dinosaurs here with man and science, absolutely denies this truth. Your contention is misplaced.

 

[Metal Minister]

Christians have an overly high opinion of humanity if they believe that all humans were specially created. Pretty strange considering how dimwitted, repulsive, and evil most humans are.

Maybe we were just a practice run?

That's a depressing thought, so let's examine it and see if we can't alleviate your fears. First, think of It like this, who did Jesus come to save? Mankind right? What form did He take when He came to die for our sins? A human form right? If we were a "practice run" as you say, why bother with any of that? Why give us the tools to find the salvation that God paid the price for in the form of the bible? You see, once sin entered the world, yes, we became desperately wicked. But as the bible, the infallible word of God says, He loves us so much, that He gave His only begotten Son to die, so that we may have eternal life with Him. Does that sound like a practice run?

 

[food4thought]

I admit that I need to do some further study on this topic in order to have a truly informed understanding of what the Bible is trying to convey.

That said, I think there are enough problems in evolutionary theory as a microbes to man process to give reasonable people pause.

 

[chiwawa]

In response to ThisBrotherOfHis:

I've heard these counter-arguments over and over. Most of them stem from not really understanding evolution at its core. By the sounds of it, it seems nothing I could present would change your mind anyway...but what the heck...

There IS quite amount of evidence. And by quite, I mean an overwhelming amount. So much that it is widely accepted around the world. And when I say it is essential to biology, I mean the study. Branches of biology like genetics and molecular biology, even medicine would not be same without it.

The fossil record is very accurate. Its like a giant public library with a very anal librarian. But there is going to be a couple books misplaced...the earth is ever changing; volcanoes, land masses pushing against each other; sometimes lower layers can get pushed up. But essentially, the deeper you go, the older the fossils.

On vestiges: I did oversimplify in saying that vestige organs have no function today. Many of them have evolved to take a different function, like the tailbone (btw tailbone is just another name for the coccyx). Goosebumps are another peculiar human vestige. Why do we get goosebumps when we're cold or scared? In our evolutionary past, we had more hair, so when we got goosebumps the hair would stand up to make us look bigger to predators, or to trap more body heat. Another interesting vestige is the eyes of naked mole rats: they don't need eyes, as they bury underground, but they have eyes with a layer of skin atop them. Why? Because their recent ancestors used them when they lived above ground. If God created them in an instant, they should not have eyes at all, like many other underground animals. There are many more examples of vestiges, which can be explained through evolution.

Imagine for example, the alleged squirrel that "morphed" into a bat.

This really shows the lack of understanding of what evolution is. Species don't "morph" into other species. Please read up on the theory if you are to refute it!

And micro and macro evolution are the same thing. Evolution needs lots of generations to pass to become evident. Micro evolution allows lots of generations to pass in a time that humans can observe in their lifetime. If you can admit micro-evolution is real, then you already believe in evolution.
Its like saying you like cupcakes, but you dont like cake. c'mon, you like cake.

In conclusion, evolution is cake.

 

[chiwawa]

Chiwawa,
There is one problem that requires a solution for the "Theory" of Evolution to stand and it is located, right here, in Texas. (Photos, the last time I looked, are searchable on the web.) The scientists have conceded that man, as we know him today, has only been walking this planet for 6 to 10 thousand years and yet there are the foot-prints of a, barefooted, modern type man inside the foot-print of a Dino.

From the Wikipedia page of "Dinosaur Valley State Park" near Glen Rose, Texas:

The family of George Adams, the man who originally made the claims, later admitted it was a hoax. "My grandfather was a very good sculptor," said Zana Douglas, from the Adams family who found many of Glen Rose’s real dinosaur tracks. She explained that in the 1930s and the Depression, Glen Rose residents made money by making moonshine and selling dinosaur fossils. The fossils brought $15 to $30 and when the supply ran low, George Adams, Zana's grandfather "just carved more, some with human footprints thrown in."

 

[Alithis]

Originally Posted by chiwawa
I really don't think nature is such a mysterious, incomprehensible thing. It clearly is not; we understand much about it, which is why were/are able to manipulate it, creating wheels, cars, houses, skyscrapers, medicine, ipods, pizza etc. We made these things because we study nature, and learn from it.
reply -yes buts that's my whole point ..we understand (in part )what is already there but we do not understand why it is that way ,we observe certain-laws in action and we perceive over time that they are non changeable?and that is why we use the term laws to describe them .but God himself is not governed by those laws . so in the case of gravity even though all the mechanisms that we understand work together to "cause" gravity were there .those causes did not make gravity work ... that's where our understanding of physics ends . because with all the proponents present ..gravity did not swing into action until GOD told it to.which means everything depends not upon everything else ..but upon Gods word declared out .. everything obeys him .that is what is beyond our comprehension.


We have to remember the original audience of the scripture. It was written in the context of ancient Palestine. If the biblical writers wrote "and then God invented the Gravitational Constant, which allowed matter to attract eventually leading to the creation of the earth", do you think the average bronze age man would take that in? of course not! It was written so these people could make sense of their world (without science at the time), and how to live their lives. But the bible is open enough to still make sense today, even with our refined science knowledge.

reply-With this part of the post you raise a whole other issue ..and im not sure where your coming from . knowledge has increased but wisdom which comes from God is on the decline .Man is not smarter now then Adam .Adam walked and talked with God one on one .he walked and conversed with the creator of the universe he was unhindered by sin names all the animals and knew their names (retained the info)
it is written in the last days knowledge will abound .. but not wisdom .. man knows more then ever before yet is displaying signs of becoming more foolish by the day .it is difficult for me to put much ..if any trust in science
__________________
add the same principles of what science calls LAW.. and what i refer to as what God has set in motion by saying " be thus" ,do not permit the evolving of mankind . biblical account gives reason for deformity in the cross breeding of fallen angels with the daughters of men.
\but then i don't think theistic evolutionist adherents believe man evolved from ape .
i suspect even atheists don't truly believe man evolved from ape ,no mater what they "say" .

 

[th1bill]

From the Wikipedia page of "Dinosaur Valley State Park" near Glen Rose, Texas:

The family of George Adams, the man who originally made the claims, later admitted it was a hoax. "My grandfather was a very good sculptor," said Zana Douglas, from the Adams family who found many of Glen Rose’s real dinosaur tracks. She explained that in the 1930s and the Depression, Glen Rose residents made money by making moonshine and selling dinosaur fossils. The fossils brought $15 to $30 and when the supply ran low, George Adams, Zana's grandfather "just carved more, some with human footprints thrown in."

And you believe wikipedia? I or you can go there and change the content there. Your answer has nothing to do with truth and certainly nothing to do with science nor Faith. You just threw a penny in a well.

If these were sculpted, the marks of the tool would be there.

 

[standingtall]

And you believe wikipedia? I or you can go there and change the content there.

The source from Wikipedia is Kennedy, Bud (August 10, 2008). "Human footprints beside dinosaur tracks? Let's talk". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. p. B02.

Here's more about the Paluxy River tracks:

http://users.manchester.edu/student/ALFreels/profweb/Portfolio/PaluxyRiverTracks.pdf

 

[th1bill]

The source from Wikipedia is Kennedy, Bud (August 10, 2008). "Human footprints beside dinosaur tracks? Let's talk". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. p. B02.

Here's more about the Paluxy River tracks:

http://users.manchester.edu/student/ALFreels/profweb/Portfolio/PaluxyRiverTracks.pdf

LOL! You actually believe that Rose carved out over 200 fake footprints? The Pdf does nothing to establish anything more than conjecture and then you send me back to the completely unreliable wiki?

 

[Bluelion]

In response to ThisBrotherOfHis:

I've heard these counter-arguments over and over. Most of them stem from not really understanding evolution at its core. By the sounds of it, it seems nothing I could present would change your mind anyway...but what the heck...

There IS quite amount of evidence. And by quite, I mean an overwhelming amount. So much that it is widely accepted around the world. And when I say it is essential to biology, I mean the study. Branches of biology like genetics and molecular biology, even medicine would not be same without it.

The fossil record is very accurate. Its like a giant public library with a very anal librarian. But there is going to be a couple books misplaced...the earth is ever changing; volcanoes, land masses pushing against each other; sometimes lower layers can get pushed up. But essentially, the deeper you go, the older the fossils.

On vestiges: I did oversimplify in saying that vestige organs have no function today. Many of them have evolved to take a different function, like the tailbone (btw tailbone is just another name for the coccyx). Goosebumps are another peculiar human vestige. Why do we get goosebumps when we're cold or scared? In our evolutionary past, we had more hair, so when we got goosebumps the hair would stand up to make us look bigger to predators, or to trap more body heat. Another interesting vestige is the eyes of naked mole rats: they don't need eyes, as they bury underground, but they have eyes with a layer of skin atop them. Why? Because their recent ancestors used them when they lived above ground. If God created them in an instant, they should not have eyes at all, like many other underground animals. There are many more examples of vestiges, which can be explained through evolution.



This really shows the lack of understanding of what evolution is. Species don't "morph" into other species. Please read up on the theory if you are to refute it!

And micro and macro evolution are the same thing. Evolution needs lots of generations to pass to become evident. Micro evolution allows lots of generations to pass in a time that humans can observe in their lifetime. If you can admit micro-evolution is real, then you already believe in evolution.
Its like saying you like cupcakes, but you dont like cake. c'mon, you like cake.

In conclusion, evolution is cake.

Funny you talk about so much evidence but produce none.

The fact is you reject the Bible which teaches man was formed from dust or clay as the Hebrew translates. The Bible teaches Adam was created a full man with intelligence that he did not evolve. He was not a man child, he could speak and had full knowledge and yet was a full grown man from second old. Same with eve. The fact is the World like man was created with age or what appeared to be. Adam was never a baby but full man. You must have a hard time believing that with an all powerful God anything is possible and her can do what he wants unrestrained by natural laws. In fact super natural is that which exceeds natural laws.

The fact is you put your faith in men and think your self wise for it, all people who do this make men out to be God. The Bible tells us to put our faith in God and we will find wisdom, that wisdom comes from God not men.

Praying for you

 

[Bluelion]

The source from Wikipedia is Kennedy, Bud (August 10, 2008). "Human footprints beside dinosaur tracks? Let's talk". Fort Worth Star-Telegram. p. B02.

Here's more about the Paluxy River tracks:

http://users.manchester.edu/student/ALFreels/profweb/Portfolio/PaluxyRiverTracks.pdf

Fact is wiki is not allowed to be used in college writing and is seen by every university in the country as unreliable source. So if it is not allowed in university as creditable I don't think you can possibly use any of it to back anything you say up. That fact is when presenting an arugement a person much use references which are creditable, or else the whole arugement is discredited.

 

[standingtall]

LOL! You actually believe that Rose carved out over 200 fake footprints? The Pdf does nothing to establish anything more than conjecture and then you send me back to the completely unreliable wiki?

Since he was selling them, you're darn right he could have.

I didn't send you back to wiki....I gave you the source that wiki used....Fort Worth Star-Telegram. If you'd care to do a little research, you can read the actual article from that newspaper that is referenced in Wikipedia.

If not, then fine.

 

[standingtall]

Fact is wiki is not allowed to be used in college writing and is seen by every university in the country as unreliable source. So if it is not allowed in university as creditable I don't think you can possibly use any of it to back anything you say up. That fact is when presenting an arugement a person much use references which are creditable, or else the whole arugement is discredited.

Wasn't using wiki as a source....was listing the source that the wiki article used.

 

[chiwawa]

And you believe wikipedia? I or you can go there and change the content there. Your answer has nothing to do with truth and certainly nothing to do with science nor Faith. You just threw a penny in a well.

If these were sculpted, the marks of the tool would be there.

Here is what John D Morris of the Institute for Creation Research says:

"The tracks in question were more likely poorly formed dinosaur tracks, random erosion marks, or deliberate alterations to the original tracks. We looked diligently for evidence of foul play, but as yet no direct evidence of evolutionary fraud has been uncovered. Christians respect the truth, and the truth is, the tracks are too ambiguous to make a clear determination. ICR holds rigorously to the view that dinosaurs lived at the same time as man, but feels that the Paluxy may not provide useful evidence for this. "

Morris was a main proponent of this footprint story, and he himself said it is fraudulent. Below is the creationist's website where I took the exerpt from:

Paluxy River: The Tale of the Trails


If this is not enough, I really can't help you.

 

[chiwawa]

reply -yes buts that's my whole point ..we understand (in part )what is already there but we do not understand why it is that way ,we observe certain-laws in action and we perceive over time that they are non changeable?and that is why we use the term laws to describe them .but God himself is not governed by those laws . so in the case of gravity even though all the mechanisms that we understand work together to "cause" gravity were there .those causes did not make gravity work ... that's where our understanding of physics ends . because with all the proponents present ..gravity did not swing into action until GOD told it to.which means everything depends not upon everything else ..but upon Gods word declared out .. everything obeys him .that is what is beyond our comprehension.

reply-With this part of the post you raise a whole other issue ..and im not sure where your coming from . knowledge has increased but wisdom which comes from God is on the decline .Man is not smarter now then Adam .Adam walked and talked with God one on one .he walked and conversed with the creator of the universe he was unhindered by sin names all the animals and knew their names (retained the info)
it is written in the last days knowledge will abound .. but not wisdom .. man knows more then ever before yet is displaying signs of becoming more foolish by the day .it is difficult for me to put much ..if any trust in science
__________________
add the same principles of what science calls LAW.. and what i refer to as what God has set in motion by saying " be thus" ,do not permit the evolving of mankind . biblical account gives reason for deformity in the cross breeding of fallen angels with the daughters of men.
\but then i don't think theistic evolutionist adherents believe man evolved from ape .
i suspect even atheists don't truly believe man evolved from ape ,no mater what they "say" .

I believe we agree in your first paragraph. God is omnipotent, so he is outside and not subject to his own laws. He set them in motion when he spoke them into being.

But I will have to respectfully disagree with the second. Maybe certain figures in the bible were wiser, but there were a lot of other people back then too. There's a lot of unwise people today, but also a lot of wise people as well.

And you do trust in science. You do it everytime you drive your car. Everytime you use your phone. Everytime you take medicine when you're sick. Everytime you fly on a plane. Everytime you buy food from a grocery store...