Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[olgamc]

Ok, so in terms of the question at hand, could God have used a natural process, The theory of evolution in full? The answer is "yes". Indeed it is compatible with Christianity.

Also imo it interferes with the simplicity of the concept of sin and salvation. God’s truth is so simple that a small child can understand it. If Adam is the first human ever created, I can explain to a 4 year old: “you are sinful because your mommy and daddy are sinful and your mommy and daddy are sinful because their mommy and daddy are sinful and we are all sinful because the first mommy and daddy were sinful.” And then the 4 year old might ask “but what about the first mommy and daddy? Didn’t they have a mommy and daddy?” And I can say “no, God just made them so they didn’t have a mommy and daddy.”

But how can I explain it to a 4 year old if Adam and Eve had a mommy and daddy?

 

[BeyondET]

Yes God's creation is amazing, but we have never found any evidence to support this theory of evolution.

It's not amazing to you, the evidence is in the processes but you believe everything was presto. Which isn't even in scripture.

Adam was the smartest man who ever lived, he was created extremely intelligent and extremely skillful and talented in every area of science and the arts. He was created with a masters degree in every single discipline, and he never spent a single day at university.

And Adam couldn't comprehend don't eat the friut, yea that's not very smart.

Today mankind is the most retarded he has ever been from the time of creation. Each generation has de-evolved into dumber and dumber people. Todays technology can't even answer the most basic questions, a four year old asks. So yeah if your impressed by their wisdom the I don't share your view.

And you are using modern technology to express how dumb mankind is, that's brilliant.

To me, the theory of evolution is most insulting theory to my intelligence. It's on par with the equally insulting big bang job. Why would God leave semi amphibious creatures lying helpless and venerable on the water shore for millions of years, waiting to grow legs. If you believe they wouldn't be snapped up by the first hungry condor, then I have a harbor bridge to sell you at a bargain price.

Did you dream that up?

 

[BeyondET]

Also imo it interferes with the simplicity of the concept of sin and salvation. God’s truth is so simple that a small child can understand it. If Adam is the first human ever created, I can explain to a 4 year old: “you are sinful because your mommy and daddy are sinful and your mommy and daddy are sinful because their mommy and daddy are sinful and we are all sinful because the first mommy and daddy were sinful.” And then the 4 year old might ask “but what about the first mommy and daddy? Didn’t they have a mommy and daddy?” And I can say “no, God just made them so they didn’t have a mommy and daddy.”

But how can I explain it to a 4 year old if Adam and Eve had a mommy and daddy?

Certainly Adam knew of parents, why would he say such a thing if he didn't.

Gen 2 - 23/24
And the man said: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for out of man she was taken.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

 

[Job 33:6]

In that I would actually disagree to an extent. I mean of course He could, but the way Genesis is written indicates that He didn’t. Again, that’s just how I read it and interpret it, and I might be wrong. But I do not believe that He set up a process, pushed a button, and sat back to watch it run. Genesis 1 tells us that every day of creation (regardless of how day is defined) God interfered. How exactly He interfered - I don’t know. But He did stop at the end of every day, evaluated all that He had made so far, declared it good, and finished for the day. And the next day He decided what to make next. And even within days it describes a progression - first He made this, then He made that. Why is that in the Bible? Somehow it’s important. My son thinks that God just set up 4 basic laws of physics and then left the world to create itself as a natural playing out of those laws. But that’s not how I read the book of Genesis and the rest of the Bible. If you believe all of the Bible, then you know that at certain points of history God interferes, and often miraculously. I read Genesis in context of the whole Scripture, and I try not to add or subtract.

Well why are you reading Genesis as if it's about material origins? You realize that it describes ancient near east cosmology right? For that reason, I don't think it's justified to try to read God's intervention into it in any sort of materialistic way. The text just doesn't offer that kind of information.

 

[Job 33:6]

There are aspects that I do not see compatible as I tried to explain before. Namely, my questions that you did not answer about Adam’s grandma.

Adams grandma would not have been subject to sin, if she lived and died before the fall. And so his grandmother never would have experienced a supernatural or spiritual death or separation from God. However, Adams grandmother could still physically die before the fall. Before spiritual death entered the world through Adam.

 

[Job 33:6]

But I wonder, do you see Adam being created not through evolution but by God’s divine interference - do you see that as being incompatible with something?

I see Adam as being created through evolution. When the Bible says that Adam is made of dust, I don't see that as a scientific description of things. Abraham says that he was dust too, but I assume that Abraham had a mother. I think of Adam the same way.

And then the Bible says that God breathed into Adam's nostrils and he became a living nephesh, or spirit. But spirits aren't material or scientific things either.

And the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the breath returns to God who gave it.
Ecclesiastes 12:7

For he knows our frame. He remembers that we are dust.
Psalms 103:14

You hide your face, they are terrified. You take away their breath, they die and return to their dust.
Psalms 104:29

By the sweat of your brow you shall eat bread, until your return to the ground. For from it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”
Genesis 3:19

Remember that you fashioned me like clay; and will you turn me to dust again?
Job 10:9

Then Abraham answered and said, “Look, please, I was bold to speak to my Lord, but I am dust and ashes.
Genesis 18:27

Your descendants shall be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west, and to the east, and to the north and to the south. And all the families of the earth will be blessed through you and through your descendants.
Genesis 28:14

 

[olgamc]

Certainly Adam knew of parents, why would he say such a thing if he didn't.

Gen 2 - 23/24
And the man said: “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for out of man she was taken.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

Of course he knew of parents. He did just go through the whole animal kingdom and had the chance to learn about the birds and the bees.

 

[Dan1988]

We've found plenty of evidence for evolution, such as transitional fossils.

Well, I've offered my house to anyone who can provide a single shred of evidence to support that outrageous theory. I made the offer some years ago and nobody has claimed the property yet. So I don't like your chances either. The property has been valued at $1.6 million, so it's worth a shot if you're a punter

 

[olgamc]

Well why are you reading Genesis as if it's about material origins? You realize that it describes ancient near east cosmology right? For that reason, I don't think it's justified to try to read God's intervention into it in any sort of materialistic way. The text just doesn't offer that kind of information.

I think Job describes ancient cosmology. I don't think Genesis does. But anyway, like I said, it's just a matter of opinion. Job obviously didn't know how the solar system works, and God was ok with that. He didn't correct Job on his science, He corrected Job on Job's wanting answers to why would God do such a thing to him. God basically said "Who do you think you are, Job, that you want to understand what I do. I do what I do and I don't answer to anybody." Which would mean that the same principle applies to us - we can be wrong about the origins of life, and that's ok. It's when we think we know better than everyone else or when we think God owes us an explanation that we become wrong.

 

[BeyondET]

Of course he knew of parents. He did just go through the whole animal kingdom and had the chance to learn about the birds and the bees.

So Adam observed man? For he said a man will leave his parents, hmm interesting.

 

[Dan1988]

Do you have a degree in Law or Philosophy or Forensics?

Also, in regard to the Philosophy of Science, as well as the Theory of Evolution, what have you read so far?

And, by the way, what is your conception and understanding of what constitutes "evidence," or even "scientific evidence"?

That's good. I won't be renouncing my faith in Christ either, even though I think evolution is true. As far as I'm concerned, it is a separate consideration, somewhat apart from the texts of the Bible.

However, I'm also of the mind that if other fellow Christians feel that a literal reading of Genesis 1, 2 & 3 is most appropriate in their understanding and in their view of Christian Faith, then I have very little compulsion to want make them think otherwise. And I'm MORE than willing to just let things ride between their literal view and my more existential and academically inclined view, just as long as they're respectful in return and don't turn their Bible into a political, Theonomic platform.

No one wants your house, so that's a silly thing to say.

It sounds like your comfortable with your private opinion on everything. I'd just like to remind you that there are 7 billion other private opinions out there. They say ignorance is bliss and the Bible says that nobody is seeking the truth and all have turned to their own way.

The Bible really hit the nail on the head, with that truth. The evidence is all around us, the world is super confused. Nobody has any foundation for what they believe, and everyone is running around trying to push their faith in themselves on other to make them feel validated. It's really quite pathetic.

Mankind has never been more deluded than right now, nobody can back anything they claim to believe with any evidence. All we get is hog wash, everywhere we look. I'm still waiting to find some educated person to present some kind of plausible theory for the existence stuff. Nobody has ever invented of fabricated a theory that makes any sense at all, so my house is safe

 

[Dan1988]

Exactly. And that is why it remains a theory.

Now, in terms of product development. As an engineer, would you be able to take a cart with wheels and make small modifications to it until it’s an airplane? Of course you could, because you are very smart and a brilliant engineer. So if you can take something that rolls on the ground and make it fly through the air, why do you think that God couldn’t? Or wouldn’t? Or didn’t? Note my choice of words - those are 3 different questions.

The reason I know God couldn't or wouldn't, is because He told us that He didn't. I appreciate this truth may be quite complicated to process, but be patient. The penny will drop one day if you keep on shaking the machine, just be patient it doesn't come to all of us quickly.

 

[Dan1988]

It's not amazing to you, the evidence is in the processes but you believe everything was presto. Which isn't even in scripture.


And Adam couldn't comprehend don't eat the friut, yea that's not very smart.

And you are using modern technology to express how dumb mankind is, that's brilliant.

Did you dream that up?

You have every right to put your blind faith in every word that came from the mouth of Charles Darwin, I would never dream of forcing you to believe in God.
Christians are called and selected by God, no man has ever chosen to believe what God said. We can only believe what He said, if He first opens our eyes to see the truth, until then everyone remains blind to the truth.

There's no point in discussing what God said with you, while you believe He's a liar

 

[BeyondET]

You have every right to put your blind faith in every word that came from the mouth of Charles Darwin,

The truth is I have never read or heard a word of what Charles Darwin said. You are resorting to making up false statements about me because you don't know me, see below is another.

I would never dream of forcing you to believe in God.

you don't have too, because i already do

Christians are called and selected by God, no man has ever chosen to believe what God said. We can only believe what He said, if He first opens our eyes to see the truth, until then everyone remains blind to the truth.

Some are blinded and some are not I agree.

There's no point in discussing what God said with you, while you believe He's a liar

Quote me as saying God is a liar,

It is worse than believing in evolution when you make up lies about people.

 

[Job 33:6]

I think Job describes ancient cosmology. I don't think Genesis does. But anyway, like I said, it's just a matter of opinion. Job obviously didn't know how the solar system works, and God was ok with that. He didn't correct Job on his science, He corrected Job on Job's wanting answers to why would God do such a thing to him. God basically said "Who do you think you are, Job, that you want to understand what I do. I do what I do and I don't answer to anybody." Which would mean that the same principle applies to us - we can be wrong about the origins of life, and that's ok. It's when we think we know better than everyone else or when we think God owes us an explanation that we become wrong.

You think Job does but Genesis doesn't? The firmament separating the waters from the waters, with the waters above remaining above?

You think the old testament has two different contexts between job and Genesis?

No offense but, I have to assume that maybe you just don't know that in ancient near east cosmologies of Egypt, Babylon, Mesopotamia, Assyria and more, they all described the waters above in their own cosmological perspectives.

They start out with a watery formless deep as well. They have the firmament and solid sky. The round circular earth etc.

So what is it that you think separates Genesis from the rest of them?

 

[Job 33:6]

Well, I've offered my house to anyone who can provide a single shred of evidence to support that outrageous theory. I made the offer some years ago and nobody has claimed the property yet. So I don't like your chances either. The property has been valued at $1.6 million, so it's worth a shot if you're a punter

Ok well, transitional fossils are evidence for evolution. So do you provide that as cash or check?

 

[Job 33:6]

Of course he knew of parents. He did just go through the whole animal kingdom and had the chance to learn about the birds and the bees.

That's actually an interesting observation. That Adam refers to a man leaving his father and mother. As if he knew that men had fathers and mothers.

Haha. No need to do gymnastics talking about how fish have parents. This is clearly written in a context related to people.

 

[olgamc]

Adams grandma would not have been subject to sin, if she lived and died before the fall. And so his grandmother never would have experienced a supernatural or spiritual death or separation from God. However, Adams grandmother could still physically die before the fall. Before spiritual death entered the world through Adam.

I don't know man, I am really confused by this. What do you mean Adam's grandma was not subject to sin? Did she sin or did she not sin? Romans 3:23 says "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned".

 

[BeyondET]

I don't know man, I am really confused by this. What do you mean Adam's grandma was not subject to sin? Did she sin or did she not sin? Romans 3:23 says "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God", Romans 5:12 says "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned".

The second verse is the answer, one man.

 

[olgamc]

That's actually an interesting observation. That Adam refers to a man leaving his father and mother. As if he knew that men had fathers and mothers.

Haha. No need to do gymnastics talking about how fish have parents. This is clearly written in a context related to people.

Why wouldn't he know that men would have fathers? God tells him to be fruitful and multiply, so he knows he will be a father. He names his wife Eve because, as he says, she is to become the mother of all the living. I don't understand. He knows he is going to be a father and she is going to be a mother, and that all babies will have a mom and a dad, so he says "a man shall leave his father and mother". What's your point?