Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[EastCoastRemnant]

THE AIG people are clowns! We know how plate tectonics works today.

God created life using evolution, that's how it was formed.

Give me the evidence that one 'kind' turned into another, please.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

You don't need a biblical reference, EastCoast, just take a look at history. If you want a biblical reference, however, one good place to look is the situation between Peter and Paul. Peter and those based in Jerusalem believed Christianity was only for practicing Jews. Yu had to keep all the Jewish customs. Paul challenged that and said gentiles, the goy, were also included. So, in early Christianity , according to Paul, you could practice Jewish customs if you wanted or you could be gentile.

If you're going to respond to something I said pages ago, please use the quote button so we will all know what you are referring to.

 

[Luke17:37]

The foundation of the original gospel was faith in God as our Father.

Original, inherited sin theory is just that, a theory. The sin of Eve and then Adam did have consequences for us all, but death was already on the earth. The loss of mortality was specific to them. It was later generations that speculated death came to all men. The old earth full of dead bones is proof. Besides, If no one ever died the earth would have quite an overcrowding problem by now.

Original sin and the sin nature of man is a theory? Death was already on the earth before sin? Have you not read these passages?

Psalm 14:1–3 (NKJV)
1 The fool has said in his heart,“There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.
2 The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
3 They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one.

Isaiah 59:2 (NKJV)
2 But your iniquities have separated you from your God;
And your sins have hidden His face from you,
So that He will not hear.

Isaiah 53:5–6 (NKJV)
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

Romans 5:12 (NKJV)
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—

1 Corinthians 15:21–22 (NKJV)
21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

You are being the judge of Scripture - the concepts and passages you can live with, you accept. The ones you don't like, you reject. That is foolish.

God and God alone is my authority. It was closed minded religious people who hid behind the scripture that rejected the Son and killed him.

Yes, God is your authority, but doesn't God reveals Himself through the Scripture and through the person of Jesus Christ (Who we get to know through Scripture)? Do you want to know what He wants from you before Judgment Day? You'll find it in the Bible.

Do you think it is better to "open minded" and reject Scripture? When Jesus talked to the Pharisees and the Sadducees, His responses to them often began with, "Have you not read?" (Matthew 12:1-8, Matthew 19:3-9, Matthew 22:23-33). Yes, they read the Scriptures but their problem was that they didn't believe them. In Matthew 15:8, Jesus called them hypocrites and He quoted Isaiah 29:13:

Isaiah 29:13 (NKJV)
13 Therefore the Lord said:
“Inasmuch as these people draw near with their mouths
And honor Me with their lips,
But have removed their hearts far from Me,
And their fear toward Me is taught by the commandment of men,

Since Christ died for sinners, the religious leaders who killed Him are not the only ones to blame. He died because of the sins of the people who become His Church (Jew and Gentile, male and female, of every language, tribe and nation)... including mine.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Hoghead isnt actually posting real theology, and that is evident by his lack of scripture references in almost all his posts. His opinions are only bare assertions.

He's definitely 'out there' with some of his contentions....

 

[Luke17:37]

When I was little I believed in Evolution without a moments thought to ever question it. I believed we used to live in caves and hunt Mammoths and what-have-you. I've seen the iconic picture of the ape slowly transitioning into a man and thought it was real because scientists said so, right?

I started to see the inconsistencies in the "science" that evolutionists had in backing up their theory and found the evidence for evolution to be quite laughable and dishonest. I quickly began to realize that convincing others how stupid the theory of evolution was (even though the evidence is clear)was not an evidential problem, but a spiritual problem. When I walked with God and studied the Bible and it's history diligently (took a few years) I learned it was only through the Bible I was able to distinguish truth from lie otherwise I would perhaps still be believing evolution was a scientific fact.

That said, I've known many Christians who love Jesus Christ and God as much as the next Christian and still believe evolution is scientific fact. What's important is they are good people and love Jesus Christ and accept him as their lord and saviour, right? Personally, the book of revelation speaks of the different standpoints in the faith and I see this theory as a necessity.

Yes, believing in evolution (for a Christian) is a spiritual authority problem. I'm glad God showed you the truth and you were willing to embrace it.

Technically, a person can reject biblical creation and still accept the gospel, but it's the rejection of biblical creation and global flood that provide a foundation for last day scoffers to reject the literal, bodily return of Christ (2 Peter 3:3-9). Also, if we are rejecting God's authority when it comes to physical things, what is the likelihood we won't reject God's authority when it comes to spiritual things? It is a poor foundation for the Christian life. And truly the gospel makes no sense without the foundation of a literal Genesis.

John 3:9–12 (NKJV)
9 Nicodemus answered and said to Him, “How can these things be?”
10 Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? 11 Most assuredly, I say to you, We speak what We know and testify what We have seen, and you do not receive Our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

 

[miamited]

Abraxos, you and other here are making the implicit assumption that your interpretation of Scripture is correct and the only one truly Christian. Now, I know for a fact that isn't completely true. The Bible is subject to many interpretations in Christianity. Yours is not the only one or necessarily the most viable. If you want to assume that the Bible is inerrant, OK, fine. But that is just your theory. So it is not beyond question. I and other fellow Christians here are simply questioning your theory and with good reason.

Hi hoghead,

It's not that we are making the implicit assumption that our interpretation of Scriptures is correct so much as it's just understanding the power of God and trusting that He wrote the Scriptures to man for man and that the plain and simple reading of the Scriptures is the plain and simple truth of what God has done. God knew what man would think a 'day' meant. God knew when he caused Moses to write that in six days He created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them, that man understood a day to be the time in which the planet makes a full rotation from one sunrise to the next sunrise. Because I know that God knew the mind and understanding of His audience, I believe that He meant for us to understand that a day was the time from one sunrise to the next.

Now, you close by saying that you and others are simply questioning this theory and with good reason, but those good reasons are all based on the fact that because of the natural properties of things, it likely isn't what God meant. Yes, I disagree. And I wonder whether, if God did create this realm exactly as He seems to have fairly clearly said it three times in the Scriptures, will He declare such people that don't agree with what He has fairly clearly said and repeated, faithful?

Speaking from a human viewpoint, if I were God and I did just miraculously and near instantly create the realm in which mankind lives, for the express purpose of mankind having life which I also created, I wouldn't think those who didn't believe me were particularly faithful. Yes, I know you're likely to respond, 'Well, you're not God'. That's true, but I understand that God is creating from the remnants of mankind a holy priesthood of 'believers' who love and trust Him and so I naturally have to ask the question: Does God consider those who deny the truth of His Scriptures, if He really did miraculously create this realm just as He said He did, believers?

Finally, the main reason that most believers don't believe the plain and simple explanation of the creation is because man's wisdom says it just can't be. Where would God come down on this issue? Would He possibly say of those that they believed in their own wisdom rather than His? It may come down to be one of the key issues on judgment day. Who believed in me? Who believed in man?

So, yes. When I read God repeating three times that He created this entire realm in three days, and Jesus saying that since the beginning marriage was created for men and women to join together, I believe that He did it in six days and that since the beginning of that time men and women were given to be joined together as one flesh.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Luke17:37]

Division, contrary to your flawed assertions, is not of the spirit. The only reason we have divisions are because we don't mind things of the spirit but rather things of the flesh... Science is ok, but whenever it divides the body, over nothing more than a fallible man made theory, then it becomes flesh works.

Notice that biblical definition of division is not disagreement over earthly things - it's about teachings contrary to the [sound] doctrine.

Romans 16:17 (NKJV)
17 Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them.

Creation is important, because it's foundational to the gospel: God created a perfect universe (Genesis 1-2), including man in His own image, male and female. Man sinned (Genesis 3). Death was the penalty for sin (Genesis 2:17, 3:21) and it had far reaching effects to the creation. A Savior was promised (Genesis 3:15).

Try explaining the gospel without defining sin, the penalty for sin (death), the need for a Savior, the promise of the Savior, the reason that Jesus could be our Savior by His literal death on a cross... Yes, Genesis 1-3 is truly foundational.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

To answer this question very simply, some Christians don't accept evolution because they have some differences in how they view the bible then the Christians who do agree with evolution.

 

[Hoghead1]

Extraneous, the same can be said for the inerrancy theory of Scripture. That is a possibly fallible human theory, and so why do you hold it is holy knowledge of God? The express purpose of science it to test out our beliefs, religious and otherwise. Many religious beliefs can't be tested, but some can. If you hold that Scripture is an inerrant geophysical witness, then that belief of yours can be easily tested out by science. It has been so and it has come up short. So I, for one, posit that God did not intend Scripture to be any form of geophysical witness, and for good reason. What you appear to be doing is using your beliefs as the sole criterion from which to judge the validity of scientific findings, and this a complete 180 from what the purpose of science is. Also, your exegesis of Scripture, you view that it represents some sort of spirit-matter or spirit-flesh dualism is something I would seriously question. From my end of it, it appears you have been reading Hellenic metaphysics back into Scripture, thereby contaminating its message.

 

[Hoghead1]

Yes, EastCoast, I probably do appear to you as "way out there." In a way, I am because I am working with a wholly different set of metaphysical assumptions and also a wholly different exegetical method. However, I am certainly not alone. I have plenty of fellow Christian scholars to back me, if that is what you are wondering about. You are working from a right-wing or conservative Christian approach. OK, fine. But not all Christians are on the right or should be on the right. It maybe works for you, brings you close to God, but for me, it was too stifling, so I moved over to the left. I think you are forgetting that Christianity is not a monolithic religion, not just one way. It is a rich plurality of diverse approaches. Thank God for that. That means we all have choices. Great, because no one church or one set of dogmas is going to work for everyone. One God, many paths. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[Hoghead1]

Extraneous, you have absolutely no authority here it tell anyone to stop sharing their theology. Also, you are putting words into my mouth and seriously misrepresenting my position. I did no say that the Bible agrees with ToE. Au contraire. I said that the Bible was not intended by God to be a scientific witness. Pitting Scripture is a serious abuse of Scripture.

 

[Hoghead1]

KW, I don't think you have read my posts very carefully at all. I never said that evolution agrees with the Bible. What I said was that God did not intend the Bible to be an accurate geophysical witness. You misconstrue the basic issue here, when you talk of holding the word in 'contempt." The issue here isn't Scripture or God. The issue here is how valid your own, personal interpretation and expectations about the Bible are anywhere near valid. I am simply arguing that they are not. Now if for that reason, you want to personally attack me, go ahead. But that is very bad form in a theological discussion. The world is full of backseat drivers and bar-stool quarterbacks, sitting on the sidelines, jeering at the players. Now, I'm one of the players and my response to all this jeering and advice from the sidelines, from laity such as you, is to ignore it. It has no scholarly value. It is, of course, interesting to hear what laity think, but I'm not about to take it seriously.

 

[Hoghead1]

Yes, Ted, but the problem is that you are presenting only man's wisdom, your POV, about how God works and what Scripture really is about. I am taking issue with your POV, because it doesn't check out with science. Not all religious beliefs are scientifically testable, but some are. The biblical cosmology can be tested out scientifically. Now the express purpose of scene is for you to test out your beliefs, however sacred they may be. Now, in the case of creation, it would appear to be the case that your beliefs are way off. Also when it comes to your theory of inerrancy, again it appears your theory doesn't test out. Now instead of revising your beliefs, as others are willing to do, you seem to be arguing that they are the sole criterion to judge the validity of scientific findings. Sorry, but you have the whole thing twisted around here. And when you argue if you were God, I can also do the same thing. I can argue that if I were God, the last thing I would do is impart complex scientific knowledge to the biblical writers, because, as all-knowing, I know I am dealing with a prescientific culture that isn't ready for these things yet.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Extraneous, the same can be said for the inerrancy theory of Scripture. That is a possibly fallible human theory, and so why do you hold it is holy knowledge of God? The express purpose of science it to test out our beliefs, religious and otherwise. Many religious beliefs can't be tested, but some can. If you hold that Scripture is an inerrant geophysical witness, then that belief of yours can be easily tested out by science. It has been so and it has come up short. So I, for one, posit that God did not intend Scripture to be any form of geophysical witness, and for good reason. What you appear to be doing is using your beliefs as the sole criterion from which to judge the validity of scientific findings, and this a complete 180 from what the purpose of science is. Also, your exegesis of Scripture, you view that it represents some sort of spirit-matter or spirit-flesh dualism is something I would seriously question. From my end of it, it appears you have been reading Hellenic metaphysics back into Scripture, thereby contaminating its message.

Why do you think it is science that tests scripture rather than the other way around? Wouldn't that make the science above scripture? Does God say anything about using the scientific method for understanding or discerning His Word? No, in fact this is the only thing the Bible does say about science... and I think it's telling.
1 Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

[Abraxos]

Hi abraxos,

I certainly hope that you're right, but...

Abraham was declared righteous because he believed God.

Jesus said that when we are born again that we receive the Holy Spirit who will lead us into all truth.

Now, surely he was talking about the things of God and not the 'truth' of geometric theorems, so...

If there is a truth concerning what God has written to us in the Scriptures concerning the creation, wouldn't those who have the Holy Spirit leading them into all truth, know that truth?

In 2005 I received the truth that God was real and the Bible was His infallible word for us. 2006 was my strongest year in my zest for God. I also believed in evolution and believed in an old earth model, but those things were trivial to me because it didn't matter to me. It wasn't until maybe 2 years ago I learned just how wrong the theory of evolution was, and quite frankly how dangerous it is to young believers.
What I'm saying is we don't see all truths as soon as you have the Holy Spirit, but when we continue to walk with God the Holy Spirit will lead us to all truths (John 16:13) and in His due time.

It must be understood also that there are Christians that have weak faith while others have a stronger faith in the Lord. Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

It is indeed true that many on that day will say "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’" Then Jesus will tell them plainly, "I never knew you depart from me ye that work iniquity!" Hence the reason for the necessity for the theory of evolution. Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? (Romans 9.21)

God uses many for His purpose, all we can do is remain humble to His word. Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Noone comes to the father except through him. There is no other road, no other way to eternal life; whoever teaches contrary to that is of the world and is an antichrist.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Now, I'm one of the players and my response to all this jeering and advice from the sidelines, from laity such as you, is to ignore it. It has no scholarly value. It is, of course, interesting to hear what laity think, but I'm not about to take it seriously.

Your hubris is beyond belief... you actually think yourself superior in knowledge of Biblical matters because you got some degrees in theology... no different than the haughty Pharisees and Sadducees. Mighty in their own knowledge but knowing nothing of God and His Word.

Seems to me, God prefers the fishermen and tax collectors to receive His Spirit over "educated men".

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

In 2005 I received the truth that God was real and the Bible was His infallible word for us. 2006 was my strongest year in my zest for God. I also believed in evolution and believed in an old earth model, but those things were trivial to me because it didn't matter to me. It wasn't until maybe 2 years ago I learned just how wrong the theory of evolution was, and quite frankly how dangerous it is to young believers.
What I'm saying is we don't see all truths as soon as you have the Holy Spirit, but when we continue to walk with God the Holy Spirit will lead us to all truths (John 16:13) and in His due time.

It must be understood also that there are Christians that have weak faith while others have a stronger faith in the Lord. Now accept the one who is weak in faith, but not for the purpose of passing judgment on his opinions. One person has faith that he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats vegetables only. The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand.

It is indeed true that many on that day will say "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’" Then Jesus will tell them plainly, "I never knew you depart from me ye that work iniquity!" Hence the reason for the necessity for the theory of evolution. Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? (Romans 9.21)

God uses many for His purpose, all we can do is remain humble to His word. Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life. Noone comes to the father except through him. There is no other road, no other way to eternal life; whoever teaches contrary to that is of the world and is an antichrist.

Great post Abraxos.... and welcome to the forums!

 

[Abraxos]

Great post Abraxos.... and welcome to the forums!

Oh hi. Thanks for the welcome, it's very much appreciated

 

[Colter]

Give me the evidence that one 'kind' turned into another, please.

Considering that one kind mutating into another is a sudden event, the likelihood of finding the first mutation would be zero. But what we do have preserved in the fossil record is different kinds that lived in different ages. This planet has been the host of many epochs of varied life forms. The dirt beneath our feet was once alive. Roughly speaking, the fossil record indicates major activity over a period of 550,000,000 years. Man is quite young and ONLY found in the most recent records.


Do you have the proof of a 6 day creation event 6,000 years ago?

 

[Luke17:37]

Considering that one kind mutating into another is a sudden event, the likelihood of finding the first mutation would be zero. But what we do have preserved in the fossil record is different kinds that lived in different ages. This planet has been the host of many epochs of varied life forms. The dirt beneath our feet was once alive. Roughly speaking, the fossil record indicates major activity over a period of 550,000,000 years. Man is quite young and ONLY found in the most recent records.


Do you have the proof of a 6 day creation event 6,000 years ago?

There's no such thing as proof when it comes to theories of origins, whether it's from the Bible or the minds of men. It's a matter of faith.

You say the fossil record shows different kinds lived in different ages. You don't have proof that the rock layers are from different ages--that's just a man's theory. The fossil record often provides specimens in rock layers which are contrary to the ones called for in the human-defined theory of evolutionary geology. Evolutionists ignore those "anomalies". There are also fossils spanning multiple rock layers and "balanced" as on the head of a pin. Unless the entire living organism was buried at the same time (formed into multiple rock layers at once), there's no way the organism wouldn't mostly decay, as it would have been upended in the atmosphere for many years.

The Bible says there was a worldwide flood, with water coming up from the fountains of the deep and water coming down from the sky. The rock layers and fossils suggesting rapid burial make sense in light of a catastrophic global flood. Even Mt. St. Helens eruption in 1980 formed rock layers and fossils including tree trunks that are sitting vertical and spanning multiple rock layers. If volcano erupting can do this, it seems logical that a worldwide flood could do it, too.