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

solid_core · Nov 30, 2019

hedrick said:
The Catholic Church has a problem that's kind of specific to them: because they claim they are inerrant, they can't change key beliefs too obviously. But in 1st world countries Catholics often believe women should be priests (definite majority), that same-sex marriage should be accepted (substantial majority, though it seems to be about legal marriage not recognition by the Church), and that abortion should be legal (razor-thin plurality). History suggests that official beliefs will slowly be reinterpreted to agree.

I can't comment on Catholic views in 3rd world countries. In a quick search I didn't find data.

Expectations of the Catholic Church
Views about same-sex marriage among Catholics - Religion in America: U.S. Religious Data, Demographics and Statistics
Views about abortion among Catholics - Religion in America: U.S. Religious Data, Demographics and Statistics

I am from the first world country and there is no woman catholic priest, catholics are loudly against abortions and do not allow divorces nor homosexual marriages. Their families are more patriarchal and their women are keeping purity before marriage more than average protestant people. But I have never heard or met a catholic who believes the universe is 6,000 years old.

They are much more conservative than the most of the protestant churches I visited or know of.

And I am a protestant so I do not say this because of some kind of pro-catholic attitude.

solid_core · Nov 30, 2019

His student said:
In Genesis one God pronounced the physical creation good.

Obviously there was a spirit world that came before that from which Satan came to tempt the man in the garden.

Do you not believe that?

God's banning of man from the garden with the tree of life and setting a guard there would seem to disagree with physical death having nothing to do with sin.

If man was created in the image of God and pronounced good there is no room for evolving further - only a degrading of that altogether good state after sin came into this world.

Look - if you folks feel that you somehow need to accommodate evolution - God ahead. Your salvation probably isn't effected by your beliefs or lack of faith and I hope to see you on the other side of this life.

But we are told not to be conformed to this world but to be transformed by the renewing of our mind to align with all that God tells us. What you are doing is refusing to conform your thinking to what God tells us. Instead - you are twisting the Word of God to align with what the world tells you to believe.

God ahead with that as you wish. But what you are doing is simply theological liberalism run amuck and denying many of the most basic tenets of the faith.

Again - I hope to see you on the other side in spite of your liberal theology.

No, I do not believe that the physical world was a good creation and the spiritual world was a bad creation. Everything is a good creation.

Taking Jewish mythology as a literal history is not what decides our salvation, so your hope is certainly well based

dqhall · Nov 30, 2019

BobRyan said:
That's in interesting statement.

Hebrews 10 says the animal sacrifices ended at the cross "he takes a way the first to establish the second" regarding the "sacrifices and offerings". You say that if we accept the entire Bible on a given topic that this is causing a problem when it comes to animal sacrifices?? seriously??

No - I claim that if you read all the Bible texts on that subject you find the Bible itself saying when it is that the time for animal sacrifices ends as a liturgy for the church. It was not "because we just felt like not doing it - as Christians".

Look at the Protestant reformation - it was all about "getting back to the Bible" as the source of doctrine and not simply "whatever idea for doctrine is most popular at the moment".

If you read all the Bible texts you may have to chose what passage to follow as not all of them are in agreement. It is risky to worship a book that is not perfect. It is risky to trash a book that contains passages of grace, mercy and truth. The Holy Spirit is greater than the book.

A prohibition of animal sacrifice occurred during Byzantine times long after the Bible demanded animal sacrifices. These later acts of the church are not recorded in the Bible. Christianity eventually banned gladiator contests in the coliseum as well. They no longer fight to the death as a spectator sport in Rome.

The Catholics read the Bible during Mass each week through a lectionary. They are also back to the Bible. It is difficult to find and remember the best passages of the Bible. A diligent person can find evidence of God’s salvation in the New Testament.

The Gospels are yet being translated into obscure tribal languages. Some groups do not have a Bible in their own language. Some groups are not fully literate. Christ commanded the Gospel must be preached to all nations - Mark 13:10.

BobRyan · Nov 30, 2019

dqhall said:
While I think parts of the Bible are inspired, I do not believe the Bible is 100% correct. By one definition any Christian not under authority of the Vatican is “Protestant.” Not all Protestants believe it is proper to sacrifice animals for propitiation of sin, even though the Bible’s tells them to sacrifice animals, thus they may say the Bible is divinely inspired, but they do not follow certain Biblical regulations.

That's in interesting statement.

Hebrews 10 says the animal sacrifices ended at the cross "he takes a way the first to establish the second" regarding the "sacrifices and offerings". You say that if we accept the entire Bible on a given topic that this is causing a problem when it comes to animal sacrifices?? seriously??

dqhall said:
Do you claim Biblical passages requiring animal sacrifice are not scripture?

No - I claim that if you read all the Bible texts on that subject you find the Bible itself saying when it is that the time for animal sacrifices ends as a liturgy for the church. It was not "because we just felt like not doing it - as Christians".

Look at the Protestant reformation - it was all about "getting back to the Bible" as the source of doctrine and not simply "whatever idea for doctrine is most popular at the moment".

dqhall said:
If you read all the Bible texts you may have to chose what passage to follow as not all of them are in agreement.

How so??

dqhall said:
A prohibition of animal sacrifice occurred during Byzantine times long after the Bible demanded animal sacrifices. These later acts of the church are not recorded in the Bible. .

They are free to "later do" anything they wish. It does not make it a problem for scripture -- Hebrews 10 was already establish fact for Christians long before that.

Heb 10
4 For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 5 Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says,
“Sacrifice and offering You have not desired,
But a body You have prepared for Me;
6 In whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have taken no pleasure.
7 “Then I said, ‘Behold, I have come
(In the scroll of the book it is written of Me)
To do Your will, O God.’”
8 After saying above, “Sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin You have not desired, nor have You taken pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the Law), 9 then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will.” He takes away the first in order to establish the second. 10 By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
11 Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12 but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God

There appears to be no confusion at all in the NT about this end of sacrifices and no gentile Christians in the NT are seen to be offering animal sacrifices. This is irrefutable.

JohnAshton · Nov 30, 2019

BobRyan said:
Until you read Ex 20:8-11 where we find that the day is the same at Sinai for the 7 day week as for Genesis 2:1-3 ... seven days.

That's your interp, yes.

BobRyan · Nov 30, 2019

dqhall said:
The Gospels are yet being translated into obscure tribal languages. Some groups do not have a Bible in their own language. Some groups are not fully literate. Christ commanded the Gospel must be preached to all nations - Mark 13:10.

Agreed. Not sure how that makes evolution the correct doctrine on origins unless your point is that the way people choose evolution is by not having access to the Bible.

BobRyan · Nov 30, 2019

BobRyan said: ↑
Starts with reading the Bible to get the doctrine on origins instead of reading Darwin to get that doctrine

thecolorsblend said:
Sacred Scripture describes the creation of mankind and, specifically, that God created mankind.

True. And if Genesis 1 and 2 were only that one statement ... and if Ex 20:11 did not point to "the very details" most unwelcomed in the story of evolutionism as the doctrine on origins then it would all be 'up in the air' as to what the details are.

How mankind changed and adapted through the course of history is not recorded in Sacred Scripture. The theory of evolution satisfactorily fills in some of the gaps on that.

there is no theory of evolution that can be stated "for in six days God created the heavens and the earth" nor is it stated in the Genesis 2:1-3 form.

Even the Hebrew and OT scholars in all world class universities freely admit that the account for origins in Genesis 1-2 and Ex 20:11 is nothing remotely compatible with evolution's own doctrine on origins. they are as far apart as day and night.

Ex 20 "six days you shall labor...for in six days the LORD made" is so obviously "not" the evolutionism that is so popular today that it goes without saying.

Gen 2:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.

Ex 20: "six days you shall labor..."
Ex 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

JohnAshton said:
That's your interp, yes.

Nope - that is me quoting. yes.

It is the Bible translators "interpreting" for us to read in our own language.

If I had been reading Hebrew and interpreting it for an English audience that would be me "interpreting".

Missionaries who go to foreign lands often have to have an interpreter. But in America when you come up to a stop sign.. no one is "asking for an interpretation".

BobRyan · Nov 30, 2019

Jamdoc said:
"What you think Men came from monkeys? Then why are there still monkeys!" Just complete and utter ignorance.

Its worse than that.

"what .. you think men came from bacteria? then why can't you show bacteria turning into eukaryotes after more than 50,000 generations of real life observation?"

yeah... stuff like that.

Jamdoc said:
The real catch is, that doesn't happen on its own

The real catch is that such a thing cannot even be force/contrived to happen in a rigged lab experiment. It has to be "imagined".

JohnAshton · Nov 30, 2019

Biblical and Book of Mormon literalism are heresies, guys, nothing more nothing less.

BobRyan said:
True. And if Genesis 1 and 2 were only that one statement ... and if Ex 20:11 did not point to "the very details" most unwelcomed in the story of evolutionism as the doctrine on origins then it would all be 'up in the air' as to what the details are.

there is no theory of evolution that can be stated "for in six days God created the heavens and the earth" nor is it stated in the Genesis 2:1-3 form.

Even the Hebrew and OT scholars in all world class universities freely admit that the account for origins in Genesis 1-2 and Ex 20:11 is nothing remotely compatible with evolution's own doctrine on origins. they are as far apart as day and night.

Ex 20 "six days you shall labor...for in six days the LORD made" is so obviously "not" the evolutionism that is so popular today that it goes without saying.

Gen 2:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. 2 By the seventh day God completed His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.

Ex 20: "six days you shall labor..."
Ex 20:11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Nope - that is me quoting. yes.

It is the Bible translators "interpreting" for us to read in our own language.

If I had been reading Hebrew and interpreting it for an English audience that would be me "interpreting".

Missionaries who go to foreign lands often have to have an interpreter. But in America when you come up to a stop sign.. no one is "asking for an interpretation".

The Liturgist · Nov 30, 2019

charsan said:
You might want to go in the sub forum here for them because they do not accept Old Earth Theistic Evolution at all they very much accept creation.

Some are young earth creationists, but most of whom I have met are not. And I know a lot of Orthodox. I go on retreats to their monasteries around the US, I like to visit their parishes during midweek services, and sometimes I wish I had gone to work for that church rather than the United Church of Christ (which had a traditionalist movement which is now failing). If my current church plant is unsuccessful I might join them.

I also have several Orthodox catechisms, the Orthodox Study Bible, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology by Fr. Michael Pomazansky, and other works, and in general, these don’t even address this dispute. Everything in the Old Testament they read as Christological prophecy. For example, Isaac is a typological prophecy of Christ; God stops Abraham from sacrificing him, but the example foreshadows the sacrifice of the only begotten son of God. The tabernacle is a prophecy of the incarnation. The Ark is a prophecy of the Mother of God. Exodus is about our journey through the wilderness, fleeing from the demons represented by the Egyptians, and then contending with our passions, as we struggle to reach the Promised Land.

Biblewriter · Nov 30, 2019

Jamdoc said:
I can't be young earth, Genesis 1 seems like a "this is a gist of it but I'm not telling you specifics" overview of creation rather than a step by step instruction, allowing for what has been scientifically discovered about the nature of the universe and its age to hold true while still being God's very good creation. I see ongoing geological, cosmological, and biological processes that take very long times to do anything and it only makes absolute sense that those processes have been going on for a very long time, canyons are still being dug by rivers inch by inch, Niagra falls recedes its bank inch by inch over the years. There have been cataclysms such as global flood but there have also been slow processes that continue to go on every day, I have witnessed microevolution in laboratory settings. So there's only so much you can do believing in young earth creationism, and not just blind yourself to everything around you that says the universe is older than 6000 years. You either have to believe that Satan created the evidence (where in scripture has Satan ever been able to create anything?), or believe that God created things to appear older than they really are which seems like, deception. Why create things that would intentionally trick people? God doesn't lie or deceive!
So I can't be a young earth creationist, which puts me at odds with most pastors in most denominations of Christianity.
I believe in Old Earth. I still believe God created it, but I believe he did so using processes we still see at work today. I am not sure if I full blown believe in theistic macroevolution or progressive creationism (God creating things according to "kinds" in waves, which is more consistent with the fossil record, and microevolution being a tool within the genetic code that God created as a blueprint for all life). But microevolution I can't ignore at all. I can't just pretend that DNA just doesn't exist and we're all just scooped up dirt breathed upon by God. In Genesis 2 God even describes anesthesia and surgery to remove one of Adam's ribs (as a source of bone marrow and stem cells) to make Eve (Genesis 2:21-23). Which had always confused me as to why Genesis 2 didn't have God just speaking Eve into existence, but then I learned about stem cells present in bone marrow and the ribs are a flat bone which is one of your main sources of hematopoiesis, it suddenly made perfect sense, God GREW Eve from stem cells from Adam's bone marrow.
Is there any denominations that support old earth and either theistic evolution or progressive creationism?

Theistic evolution is flatly contrary to scripture. Old earth creationism is not.

JohnAshton · Nov 30, 2019

And none of the above, imo, is about salvation issues.

JohnAshton · Nov 30, 2019

When writing I think we should keep in that "History [or theology] which is dependent on an individual’s faith is a statement of convictions, not a statement of the convictions of his or her inquiry. If we are interested in the former rather than the latter, then we should be searching for a pastor—not a historian." Thanks to Paul M. Edwards, a Community of Christ theologian and historian.
“The Irony of Mormon History,” Utah Historical Quarterly 41 (1973): 394–95.

dqhall · Nov 30, 2019

BobRyan said:
Agreed. Not sure how that makes evolution the correct doctrine on origins unless your point is that the way people choose evolution is by not having access to the Bible.

Some of the details of the creation story in Genesis can not be confirmed. It described a six day creation when geological records indicate many millions of years of creation occurred.

The story was told as if God rested on the seventh day. Jesus said God works seven days a week.

Then there was a talking snake in the Garden of Eden. There was an apple so toxic it caused the downfall of mankind. Am not sure mankind ever lived so long without dying. The book described a tree of life in a garden that people can not locate, except David Rohl claimed to have found the place. He did not find the tree of life.

Having studied Biblical archaeology, I know parts of the books of Kings are factual.

Other than the statements about God creating this planet, I realize parts of Genesis can not be proven to my satisfaction. I do not believe that man is the most intelligent being in the universe. Life on earth did not develop by chance as God intervened to save some people..

ViaCrucis · Nov 30, 2019

Jamdoc said:
Is there any denominations that support old earth and either theistic evolution or progressive creationism?

Most churches don't proscribe what members are supposed to believe on this matter. So members are free to be YEC or OEC or Theistic Evolutionists, etc. You can find Lutherans who are young earth creationists, and you can find Lutherans who accept evolution. You can find Catholics who are young earth creationists, and you can find Catholics who accept evolution. Same with Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, et al.

Now, some denominations are dogmatically YEC, but these tend to be more the exception than the rule. Though given how vocal, especially in places like the US, some can be, one would be excused if they thought that YECism was the norm in all churches. But this simply isn't the case.

YECism has never been the official or orthodox teaching of the Christian faith, though in various forms has been one opinion among many opinions held by Christians over the centuries. But it's not hard when one goes and reads what the fathers, theologians, and teachers down through the centuries have said to realize that literal, YEC or YEC-like readings aren't the unanimous position. Hence we have statements such as these, in this case, from St. Augustine of Hippo:

"Often, a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances, … and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn.

The shame is not so much that an ignorant person is laughed at, but rather that people outside the faith believe that we hold such opinions, and thus our teachings are rejected as ignorant and unlearned. If they find a Christian mistaken in a subject that they know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions as based on our teachings, how are they going to believe these teachings in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think these teachings are filled with fallacies about facts which they have learnt from experience and reason.

Reckless and presumptuous expounders of Scripture bring about much harm when they are caught in their mischievous false opinions by those not bound by our sacred texts. And even more so when they then try to defend their rash and obviously untrue statements by quoting a shower of words from Scripture and even recite from memory passages which they think will support their case ‘without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance.’" - St. Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram

-CryptoLutheran

His student · Nov 30, 2019

solid_core said:
No, I do not believe that the physical world was a good creation and the spiritual world was a bad creation. Everything is a good creation.

No one said that the physical world was a good creation and the spiritual world was a bad creation.

Jamdoc · Nov 30, 2019

Biblewriter said:
Theistic evolution is flatly contrary to scripture. Old earth creationism is not.

I don't see it that way because of things in genesis 1 I mentioned before, that it's inconsistent with "speaking things into existence" because several times it has the act of speaking separate from the act of creating. Which means the actual methods of creation have been obscured from us. Probably for our own good and protection. At the very least, 6 day creation can still be accomplished with God growing things to maturity using DNA, still modifying life from other life rather than magic, which still gives a purpose and reason for all life to have highly conserved genetic code. There is no purpose from that if He just spoke everything into existence, we could very easily all be on incompatible genetic codes that would prevent the development of chimeras. Unless you're saying you think it's impossible for God to grow creatures from DNA and stem cells in a day he can only poof them into existence with magic.

charsan · Nov 30, 2019

The Liturgist said:
Some are young earth creationists, but most of whom I have met are not. And I know a lot of Orthodox. I go on retreats to their monasteries around the US, I like to visit their parishes during midweek services, and sometimes I wish I had gone to work for that church rather than the United Church of Christ (which had a traditionalist movement which is now failing). If my current church plant is unsuccessful I might join them.

I don't know about any of that but here in their subforum I have seen debates and the majority onion is Creation not evolution.

Jipsah · Nov 30, 2019

joshua 1 9 said:
We are told a day is 1,000 years.

And that 1000 years is a day Which means that God doesn't reckon time as we do. It doesn't mean "OH, when the Bible says a day it really means a thousand years, or that when the Bible says a thousand years it really means a day.

Jipsah · Nov 30, 2019

Oscarr said:
That's because many believe in a small God with not enough power to create a whole universe in six days and bring it to full maturity in that amount of time.

Baloney. God could have done it all in a nanosecond. We don't believe that He did. Why? Because we have tons of empirical evidence that the universe God made has been around for a very long time as we reckon time. Young Earthers seem to believe that God is bound by time as we are. That's silly. God created time. He isn't bound by it.

But that is not the almighty and all-powerful God of the Bible.

Neither is God as envisioned by Young Earthers, who say that God cannot have created the universe over aeons of time as His temporal creatures (i.e., us) perceieve time. You try and hang the same constraints on the Creator that apply to His creatures. That's nonsense.

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

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Watching and Praying Always

Charismatic Episcopal Church

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Similar threads