Is there a denomination that accepts theistic evolution/old earth?

[Halbhh]

create a whole universe in six days and bring it to full maturity in that amount of time.

I believe the amazing reality we see, vast almost beyond comprehension, the heavens just breathtaking, He created just for the sheer wonder and beauty of it, and that He is able, far more than many realize.

Hundreds of billions of galaxies over dozens of billions of light years in expanse. Perhaps 10^24 stars!

Able.

When I look up and see His amazing design, it doesn't cause a lack of faith. Just the opposite.

God bless you.

 

[Halbhh]

If he says six days, why would you disregard that detail? It is clearly written right there.

We should not even assume we know what He choose not to tell us -- the amount of time that passed during verse 1 before the moment in verse 2. We should not try to insist we know it was zero or 15 seconds or 5 hours or such.

Let's put aside these speculative doctrines and listen with awe.

Ideally, a person humbly quiets their own thoughts, agendas, doctrines, and truly listens. Then one can hear, and be changed. When we do, we can begin to hear the real meanings, which are not trivial things like which animals came first, whether worms were included, or how much time passed in mere days or years as if time mattered for God.

These speculative ideas that try to set the age of Earth, which God choose not to tell us -- those should not even matter to us, after we have truly listened (for real!), where speculative doctrines (all the varieties, all 15 or 23 varieties of them) are nothing to us emotionally, not important to argue about, and we humbly admit we are not God and don't know everything about physics and such, but that God is the One Who knows, and He is the reason, and the Lord God is everything (not us). He is God, and we are not.

 

[The Barbarian]

However many in the mainline churches, and I think the Catholic church, believe that Genesis is not historical at all. (You're certainly not required to believe that, but it's the usual belief among the leadership.)

Yes. While some popes have expressed personal opinions favoring a figurative interpretation of Genesis, no Pope has said so ex cathedra; it's officially an open question as far as the Church is concerned.

 

[hedrick]

Yes. While some popes have expressed personal opinions favoring a figurative interpretation of Genesis, no Pope has said so ex cathedra; it's officially an open question as far as the Church is concerned.

It used to be required to believe in a literal Adam, even if you didn't believe the universe was created in six days. I'm pretty sure most priests in the US don't hold that anymore, but there's some ambiguity in the official position. Not ex cathedra, of course.

Catholic Church has evolving answer on reality of Adam and Eve | Archdiocese of Baltimore

I don't think Catholic theology, or mainline Protestant theology for that matter, has quite faced up to the problem of how to deal with evolution. The obvious implication of evolution is that we were always imperfect. Indeed part of our strength is our adaptability, but that's based on learning from mistakes, not being perfect all the time. I don't see any problem with this, but it contradicts significant parts of traditional theology, which is based on the idea of Christ as a new Adam, who reverses the Fall and produces a new humanity. In some generic sense the Fall is blindingly obvious: we're obviously all morally compromised. But if that's part of our basic nature I think it causes some problems.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

What does God Say?
What did Jesus Himself Say about Adam and Havah ? (Eve)

 

[Rick Otto]

Barbarian, regarding YE creationist additions to scripture:
That is man's addition to God's word, which does not say that.

Please iterate the part you consider additional. Are you meaning to say that interpreting 6 days literally is man's addition?

You are not God.

Not sure how you know that or even why you felt it necessary to point it out, but I confess I'm disinclined to argue, regardless. Thank you, anyway.

I'm noting the YE creationist revision of scripture is at odds with scripture as it is.

I'm asking honestly what part of the YE creationism is a revision of which scripture?
I'm not demanding, tho. I know I can seem to be, but if you're not willing to go there, I'm content being left to imagine why.

About the flood. No one but God knows if it was a real event or an allegory.

You might be right, but I doubt it for several what I think to be fairly decent reasons.

You knew these were too different things. Why would you say otherwise?

You know that dictating what scripture says and then admitting not knowing is what you did. Why would you now pretend that you didn't?

It seems to me we probably just got off on the wrong foot here because we probably have some fundamentally different definitions of some things like "God" & "faith"... stuff like that.
No big deal. I can agree to disagree.

 

[Rick Otto]

It used to be required to believe in a literal Adam, even if you didn't believe the universe was created in six days. I'm pretty sure most priests in the US don't hold that anymore, but there's some ambiguity in the official position. Not ex cathedra, of course.

Catholic Church has evolving answer on reality of Adam and Eve | Archdiocese of Baltimore

I don't think Catholic theology, or mainline Protestant theology for that matter, has quite faced up to the problem of how to deal with evolution. The obvious implication of evolution is that we were always imperfect. Indeed part of our strength is our adaptability, but that's based on learning from mistakes, not being perfect all the time. I don't see any problem with this, but it contradicts significant parts of traditional theology, which is based on the idea of Christ as a new Adam, who reverses the Fall and produces a new humanity. In some generic sense the Fall is blindingly obvious: we're obviously all morally compromised. But if that's part of our basic nature I think it causes some problems.

I recently ran across a version of events that paints Darwin himself in a sympathetic light, naming Wallace as the Godless agenda driven bad guy.
You ever hear anything like that?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I recently ran across a version of events that paints Darwin himself in a sympathetic light, naming Wallace as the Godless agenda driven bad guy.
You ever hear anything like that?

hmmm.....

WHO created 'Darwin', from conception on forming his body in the womb,
and gave him life to live in this world ?

 

[Rick Otto]

What does God Say?
What did Jesus Himself Say about Adam and Havah ? (Eve)

lol, it depends who you ask, yesh.

 

[Albion]

I recently ran across a version of events that paints Darwin himself in a sympathetic light, naming Wallace as the Godless agenda driven bad guy.
You ever hear anything like that?

As regards Darwin, yes. And it has merit, but not by agreeing with everything he wrote.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

lol, it depends who you ask, yesh.

If you want to know what the pastor of your church, or of a church , says,
who do you ask ?

If you want to know what God Says, ask God.

 

[Rick Otto]

Yes, most denominations world wide either accept evolution and old universe or do not have any doctrinal statement regarding this.

Catholics, orthodox, luterans, calvinists, most evangelical churches etc. In Europe, Canada and other developed regions, almost any church accepts science.

The only denominations I know of that are loudly against evolution are SDA (even its difficult to call SDA a christian denomination), pentecostals, charismatics and similar. They draw most media attention, though, because media likes conflict, conflict sells. So it looks like its a standard Christian view, to the outsiders.

I have less of a problem considering SDA as Christian than most mainstream denoms for what I think are pretty good reasons in spite of my dim view of all denominizing beyond the 7 I see in Revelation.
What I see is science idolatry and personality cult at epidemic levels, attacking our spiritual immune system (faith) and disarming us (truth).

 

[Rick Otto]

If you want to know what the pastor of your church, or of a church , says,
who do you ask ?

If you want to know what God Says, ask God.

Yup.
But most people don't really believe a personal relationship is even possible. Church "authorities" have talked them out of it. You have to talk to them to hear from God. They'll tell ya what He says to do with your life.

 

[His student]

is there a denomination that accepts theistic evolution/old earth?

Yes there are many liberal denominations.

Run from them like a scalded cat.

 

[hedrick]

What does God Say?
What did Jesus Himself Say about Adam and Havah ? (Eve)

Nothing directly. But there are a few places where he refers to OT figures and events that seem not to have happened. This another issue that’s not being dealt with. Are we OK with Jesus making factual errors?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Nothing directly. But there are a few places where he refers to OT figures and events that seem not to have happened. This another issue that’s not being dealt with. Are we OK with Jesus making factual errors?

Jesus NEVER makes any kind of error, ever, no, not even one.

Jesus SAYS "MY SHEEP HEAR MY VOICE"..... and FOLLOW HIM...

That's about as DIRECT as HE CAN BE !

 

[solid_core]

Nothing directly. But there are a few places where he refers to OT figures and events that seem not to have happened. This another issue that’s not being dealt with. Are we OK with Jesus making factual errors?

Stories can be useful for spiritual teaching without being historical.

"Historical" view as such was quite unknown in the age of mythology and gods. Ancient people were more interested in meaning than in facts.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I recently ran across a version of events that paints Darwin himself in a sympathetic light, naming Wallace as the Godless agenda driven bad guy.
You ever hear anything like that?

"in a good light" I believe Darwin REPENTED BEFORE HE DIED, and had great grief for his ideas of evolution.
HE apparently knew it was wrong, before he died.
Maybe not, but "in a good light" we can hope so for his sake, eh?

 

[Albion]

Yes there are many liberal denominations.

and also plenty of conservative ones that accept theistic evolution.

Keeping that straight and accurate is the only way to be fair with the OP and the person who asked us for guidance about which denominations are on which side ("Is there any denominations that support old earth and either theistic evolution or progressive creationism?").

 

[Daniel9v9]

First, life is life, you eat something, it has to die for you to absorb the nutrients to sustain yourself. Second, Genesis at least does not make mention as to whether or not animals died before Adam sinned. The only thing specific is that Adam brought death unto himself and his seed. Where the bible omits things that we have questions about (and Genesis is very short, very basic, a lot of fastforward and begats, a lot omitted), you have to look to God's creation itself and try to piece together the best answers you can.
There are a lot of forms of life, and remember, man was created last, so these life forms were created before men, that are carnivores, parasites, carrion feeders, and things like fungus and bacteria that break down and decay dead things. Humans didn't die before sin, that part is NOT omitted from Genesis. But animal death is not clearly stated one way or the other, so animals dying and feeding on each other can still be a part of the plan, and is absolutely necessary for population control in a balanced ecosystem. God said "be fruitful and multiply". The world would be absolutely overrun if you had insects breeding but never dying. Some species entire reproductive strategies involve reproducing by the hundreds or more, anticipating most of the young will die but a few will survive to breed in the future. In biology we call this the R strategy, reproduce frequently in high numbers hoping that some survive but with minimal investment in each one. The adults tend to have short lifespans as well, so it's necessary (and designed this way) for them to reproduce a lot to keep their numbers up.
Humans are what biologists call k strategists, few offspring, HIGH investment in each one, longer lifespan (or in humans case originally intended to be immortal)
God creating things that breed literally more frequently and in higher numbers but rabbits but never die, this planet is too small for that. Note that when we're reborn in new creation, there won't be marriage anymore, and by extension, no sex or children, so the population control won't be a factor, at least not for humans. Again, revelations isn't very clear about animals, that's mostly omitted. There's some stuff pertaining to Christ's 1000 year rule before creation is remade, with the wolf and the lamb lying down next to each other to suggest there won't be predator and prey relationships anymore. But that's about it.

Respectfully, I think you’re quite wrong. There is no mention of animals consuming animals or death or decay before the fall. Genesis is a short account, but the sum of Scriptures points to that there was neither death nor decay before the fall. We can see this clearly echoed in the new creation as well, which is God’s creation restored.

Again, we can’t force the framework of natural law as we know and experience it in our time on nature before the fall.

Anyway, I don’t want to derail the thread so I’ll leave it at this.