Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[The Barbarian]

At least I don't disapprove of the way He said He did it

If the Bible is correct, you do.

 

[Fervent]

If the Bible is correct, you do.

Respecting the Biblical account, the question quickly becomes which version of "how" is correct since the order is different between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. Of course, Genesis "literalists" seem to completely miss that little detail and instead insist that whatever modern construction of the Genesis account they were raised on must be the true literal account. You know, with all the details that aren't actually found in the Bible.

 

[The Barbarian]

Respecting the Biblical account, the question quickly becomes which version of "how" is correct since the order is different between Genesis 1 and Genesis 2.

Which pretty much removes any possibility of it being a literal history. Yes.

 

[Fervent]

Which pretty much removes any possibility of it being a literal history. Yes.

Yep, but the issue is one of hermeneutics rather than science. The science just tends to get mangled by people desperately clinging to a simplistic reading trying to combat people who have rejected God for other reasons and prop up that rejection through science. It seems to me those of us who believe, and don't have an issue accepting the current scientific models as relatively factual would be better served focusing on the hermeneutical differences rather than trying to argue against "science" that is either intellectually dishonest, or completely uninformed.

 

[The Barbarian]

Yep, but the issue is one of hermeneutics rather than science.

Bottom line, it doesn't affect one's salvation anyway. Even if one takes the Creation account as a literal history, one's salvation is not endangered thereby.

 

[Jipsah]

The issue is that you seem to disapprove of the way He did it.

That is the net effect of YEC. We can look and see that the Genesis accounts are purely symbolic, intended to convey a general overview of the Creation, centered around God (imagine that!). And that's all the people of that time were prepared to grasp. Basic pedagogy demands that you meet your students where they are, with what their existing knowledge prepares them to grasp, and then build them up from there. The YEC are, in effect, saying is that everything they need to know was in the First Reader, and anyone who says there's more to it than that is deceived, bad, or both.

-sigh-

 

[Fervent]

Bottom line, it doesn't affect one's salvation anyway. Even if one takes the Creation account as a literal history, one's salvation is not endangered thereby.

Absolutely, but the damage that focusing on YEC does to the credibility of Christians in general does affect the gospel witness in general. Which has the potential to affect the salvation of those who do not yet know Christ. Allowing the debate to center on questions of mechanism rather than hermeneutics plays into the hands of Satan. Even if it is attempting to combat YEC claims from a scientific Christian POV. The problem is the distinctively fundamentalist view of verbal plenary inspiration, which is often adopted without critical analysis by Christians and locks many into feeling a need to defend the Bible against secular science by any means necessary.

 

[truthpls]

If the Bible is correct, you do.

The bible says God formed man and took a woman out of a bone of his, or rib. Do you believe that much?

 

[The Barbarian]

The bible says God formed man and took a woman out of a bone of his, or rib. Do you believe that much?

We know it's a figurative statement, since the person resulting from such a procedure would be a man. XY, you know.

So like much of the creation story, the text itself makes clear that it's figurative and not a literal history.

 

[The Barbarian]

Absolutely, but the damage that focusing on YEC does to the credibility of Christians in general does affect the gospel witness in general. Which has the potential to affect the salvation of those who do not yet know Christ. Allowing the debate to center on questions of mechanism rather than hermeneutics plays into the hands of Satan.

Precisely.

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."
St. Augustine De Genesi ad Litteram

It damages the faith of many people taught to believe YE creationism. Former YE creationist Glenn Morton recounts how many of his fellow YE creationist geologists lost their faith when they found that nothing they were taught about creation in opposition to the science of geology turned out to be true.

Why I Left Young-Earth Creationism

In memory of Glenn Morton (1950-2020), Peaceful Science is republishing his personal account and testimony of leaving Young-Earth Creationism.

peacefulscience.org

 

[Fervent]

Precisely.

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on thteir wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion."
St. Augustine De Genesi ad Litteram

It damages the faith of many people taught to believe YE creationism. Former YE creationist Glenn Morton recounts how many of his fellow YE creationist geologists lost their faith when they found that nothing they were taught about creation in opposition to the science of geology turned out to be true.

Why I Left Young-Earth Creationism

In memory of Glenn Morton (1950-2020), Peaceful Science is republishing his personal account and testimony of leaving Young-Earth Creationism.

peacefulscience.org

Yeah, Biblical literalism in general can be very damaging to a person's faith. A lot of fundamentalists don't make it through seminary with their faith intact because they encounter stuff that they can't incorporate into their fundamentalist upbringing(like dealing with textual issues of the Bible manuscripts) and end up chucking the whole thing as superstitious nonsense. I believe that's what happened to Bart Ehrman, as an example. Even if they don't lose their faith, it can be very dangerous because YEC isolates the believers and ends up making them a captive audience for predatory hucksters.

 

[truthpls]

We know it's a figurative statement, since the person resulting from such a procedure would be a man. XY, you know.

So like much of the creation story, the text itself makes clear that it's figurative and not a literal history.

So not real then according to you. Keep us posted on what we need to believe and what we should reject then, I guess.

 

[truthpls]

Yeah, Biblical literalism in general can be very damaging to a person's faith. A lot of fundamentalists don't make it through seminary with their faith intact because they encounter stuff that they can't incorporate into their fundamentalist upbringing(like dealing with textual issues of the Bible manuscripts) and end up chucking the whole thing as superstitious nonsense. I believe that's what happened to Bart Ehrman, as an example. Even if they don't lose their faith, it can be very dangerous because YEC isolates the believers and ends up making them a captive audience for predatory hucksters.

It is a positive thing to discover that most seminaries are faith attacking hooey.

 

[Fervent]

It is a positive thing to discover that most seminaries are faith attacking hooey.

If you consider engaging with serious examinations of documented historical evidence regarding preservation of the Bible "faith attacking hooey," then sure.

And I'd like to thank you for being a "case in point" regarding the isolating tendency of fundamentalism/YEC. Gotta stay in your bubble to keep the faith.

 

[The Barbarian]

We know it's a figurative statement, since the person resulting from such a procedure would be a man. XY, you know.

So like much of the creation story, the text itself makes clear that it's figurative and not a literal history.

So not real then according to you.

You think Jesus' parables are "not real?" Seriously? I think we've located the problem. "Figurative" is not a synonym for "not real."

 

[The Barbarian]

It is a positive thing to discover that most seminaries are faith attacking hooey.

I probably would disagree with something or other taught at most seminaries, but I know the difference between disagreeing with me and "faith attacking hooey."

 

[truthpls]

If you consider engaging with serious examinations of documented historical evidence regarding preservation of the Bible "faith attacking hooey," then sure.

And I'd like to thank you for being a "case in point" regarding the isolating tendency of fundamentalism/YEC. Gotta stay in your bubble to keep the faith.

Nothing about documents mandates doubt in the bible. What is good is that believers caught in some seminary wake up and realize that their teachers are not inspired or worth listening to when it comes to matters of the spirit and word.

 

[truthpls]

I probably would disagree with something or other taught at most seminaries, but I know the difference between disagreeing with me and "faith attacking hooey."

If it attacks faith rather than builds faith in a seminary then it is not of God.

 

[Fervent]

Nothing about documents mandates doubt in the bible. What is good is that believers caught in some seminary wake up and realize that their teachers are not inspired or worth listening to when it comes to matters of the spirit and word.

Most of the seminarians who lose their faith cite being confronted with the manuscript history as the largest reason for their loss of faith. BUt what would they know about why they lost faith, huh?

 

[The Barbarian]

If it attacks faith rather than builds faith in a seminary then it is not of God.

My experience is that most Christian seminaries build faith. Even those of other denominations seem to do this.

Even if I don't agree with absolutely everything they teach.