Evolution: where does it fit in with Christianity?

[rs9896]

I have come from a strong Christian background, but have been having some doubts recently about my faith, which is quite worrying. I would like to try and make up my mind, so I just want to put forward a few of my ideas to try and shed some light on a few problems I have come across recently

I know quite a lot about evolution and of God and the more I look into it the less compatible the two seem. Evolution is suggested to be a consequence of the natural fight for survival seen nature. When an animal reproduces the offspring may have mutated genes which may create a new characteristic. If this characteristic aids the species in its survival the new gene is passed on. If the new gene inhibits the species in its survival, the gene is lost, so the imperfections are lost. Or so the theory of evolution says.
If you take the stance that God was the one who set in place these laws of nature so evolution could carry out. If he is all powerful and all knowing, why didn't he make all animals perfect in the first place? so there was no need for some sort of "natural correction".
If you take the stance that God and evolution are incompatible, how do you explain the evidence that all animals are related and can be sourced back to a few original organisms which have evolved. The evidence has been shown through mapping animals' genetic code and revealing their striking similarities. I have heard the argument that no one has seen evolution happening, so therefore there is no evidence. This seems a strange argument seeing as no one alive has seen Jesus, but people say that The Bible is sufficient evidence for his existence.

Thanks
Rob

 

[texastig]

If "all animals are related and can be sourced back to a few original organisms which have evolved", then why isn't there any transitional fossils.

There's lots of early attestation for Christ.

 

[rs9896]

If "all animals are related and can be sourced back to a few original organisms which have evolved", then why isn't there any transitional fossils.

There's lots of early attestation for Christ.

There are transitional fossils, for example showing how the reptile jaw, slowly changed into the mammal jaw. Also how the chimpanzee skull slowly enlarged to give rise to the human skull.

I wasn't discounting the early attestations for Christ I was just using it as an example to discount the argument that evolution does not exist because we haven't seen it happen.

 

[TheManeki]

Hi Rob! Welcome!

I know quite a lot about evolution and of God and the more I look into it the less compatible the two seem. Evolution is suggested to be a consequence of the natural fight for survival seen nature. When an animal reproduces the offspring may have mutated genes which may create a new characteristic. If this characteristic aids the species in its survival the new gene is passed on. If the new gene inhibits the species in its survival, the gene is lost, so the imperfections are lost. Or so the theory of evolution says.
If you take the stance that God was the one who set in place these laws of nature so evolution could carry out. If he is all powerful and all knowing, why didn't he make all animals perfect in the first place? so there was no need for some sort of "natural correction".

Remember that the different environments across the globe and over the years are not static. They change over time, and organisms must adapt as their environments change. The goal of evolution is not perfection, but rather to fit best into niches in the ecosystem as they become available.

If you take the stance that God and evolution are incompatible, how do you explain the evidence that all animals are related and can be sourced back to a few original organisms which have evolved. The evidence has been shown through mapping animals' genetic code and revealing their striking similarities. I have heard the argument that no one has seen evolution happening, so therefore there is no evidence. This seems a strange argument seeing as no one alive has seen Jesus, but people say that The Bible is sufficient evidence for his existence.

Generally that one is answered by ignoring all the science on the matter, as texastig's post did.

Perhaps you'd like to check out the forum Creation & Evolution - Christian Forums?

See you around!

 

[rs9896]

Hi Rob! Welcome!



Remember that the different environments across the globe and over the years are not static. They change over time, and organisms must adapt as their environments change. The goal of evolution is not perfection, but rather to fit best into niches in the ecosystem as they become available.

Generally that one is answered by ignoring all the science on the matter, as texastig's post did.


See you around!

Yes, you right. I suppose I should rephrase the question to why didn't God create animals so they were able to adapt to the changing environment without some sort of cruel natural selection, so each animal had an equal opportunity for survival.

I will have a look at that forum thanks for your answer! =)

 

[TheManeki]

Yes, you right. I suppose I should rephrase the question to why didn't God create animals so they were able to adapt to the changing environment without some sort of cruel natural selection, so each animal had an equal opportunity for survival.

Hmmm...well, when you put it that way, it looks like you're asking the age-old question of why a good God would allow evil. Better people than I have tried to answer that for millennia, with only partial successes at best.

Hey, while we're suggesting forums, perhaps you'd also like this one: Whosoever Will, May Come - Liberal - Christian Forums

We like people who ask questions like you do.

 

[1watchman]

I highly recommend all readers interested in this subject, visit www.icr.org and see what Godly scientists say about it. This is an excellent web site to honor God in all science questions by highly trained scientists. They can send their monthly magazine on Acts & Facts which is very interesting.

- 1 Watchman

 

[rs9896]

Hmmm...well, when you put it that way, it looks like you're asking the age-old question of why a good God would allow evil. Better people than I have tried to answer that for millennia, with only partial successes at best.

It seems to me that god can't be all loving, if there is cruelty in the world. Either that or can't be controlling everything that happens.

 

[Assyrian]

I have come from a strong Christian background, but have been having some doubts recently about my faith, which is quite worrying. I would like to try and make up my mind, so I just want to put forward a few of my ideas to try and shed some light on a few problems I have come across recently

The emphasis in the New Testament is that God is the creator of everything, rather than teaching any any particular method or schedule of creation. So if we learn from science that the earth is billions of years old and that life evolved, this simply means that this is how God created everything. It does not change the NT teaching that God is the creator.

I know quite a lot about evolution and of God and the more I look into it the less compatible the two seem. Evolution is suggested to be a consequence of the natural fight for survival seen nature. When an animal reproduces the offspring may have mutated genes which may create a new characteristic. If this characteristic aids the species in its survival the new gene is passed on. If the new gene inhibits the species in its survival, the gene is lost, so the imperfections are lost. Or so the theory of evolution says.
If you take the stance that God was the one who set in place these laws of nature so evolution could carry out. If he is all powerful and all knowing, why didn't he make all animals perfect in the first place? so there was no need for some sort of "natural correction".

God isn't bound by our human limitations and short lifespan either. He simply is in a hurry 2Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slow... as some count slowness, but is patient. Jesus described his Father as a gardener, they like to watch things grow and develop.

 

[rs9896]

The emphasis in the New Testament is that God is the creator of everything, rather than teaching any any particular method or schedule of creation. So if we learn from science that the earth is billions of years old and that life evolved, this simply means that this is how God created everything. It does not change the NT teaching that God is the creator.

God isn't bound by our human limitations and short lifespan either. He simply is in a hurry 2Pet 3:9 The Lord is not slow... as some count slowness, but is patient. Jesus described his Father as a gardener, they like to watch things grow and develop.

I think its very strange how as soon as new scientific theory comes out, for example evolution and the big bang theory, Christians start reinterpreting the bible more and more generally to include these theories. For example your quote was completely taken out of context, where the full quote is: "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." It is not referring to species development, as you have implied but referring to his patience in human kind to repent.
I just wonder where this will stop, for example if someone in the scientific field proved tomorrow, one theory which exists, (known as the big crunch) that the universe has been expanding and shrinking continuously and has always been doing that, and will continue doing so. This suggests there is no need for a creator. Would Christians then decide that God is then the one not creating the universe but controlling its movements as it expands and shrinks.

 

[texastig]

There are transitional fossils, for example showing how the reptile jaw, slowly changed into the mammal jaw. Also how the chimpanzee skull slowly enlarged to give rise to the human skull.

I wasn't discounting the early attestations for Christ I was just using it as an example to discount the argument that evolution does not exist because we haven't seen it happen.

Oh, I'm sorry, I meant to say thousands of transitional fossils. I do believe in adaptation but not evolution.
Sorry about not understanding your last paragraph above.

 

[texastig]

It seems to me that god can't be all loving, if there is cruelty in the world. Either that or can't be controlling everything that happens.

If God wasn't all loving, we would not have a choice. Freewill gives us choices to be good or to be cruel. It is us who makes that choice.

 

[RepTheKing]

The one thing that we should remember is that God did create everything perfect. It was the original sin that changed everything. Chenck the archives. The Devil is in charge of this world right now. This all will play out as the church age is finished and then Christ will restore His creation. Remember in Revelation when the Lamb takes the two sided scroll, which is the title deed to the earth?

A note on gene mapping......I think of it like a builder using the same parts to build many different things. Like when I give my kids leggos and they build all kinds of wildly different things with them. But as we take them apart they are made of the same things....so are they related? Nope. Just the same builder.

 

[Assyrian]

I think its very strange how as soon as new scientific theory comes out, for example evolution and the big bang theory, Christians start reinterpreting the bible more and more generally to include these theories.

It goes back a lot further than that. When Copernicus came along and showed the earth went round the sun, we had to go back and reinterpret all the passages we thought said it is the sun that moves and the earth stands still. I would say the problem with Copernicus and Galileo is that the church didn't deal with the new science fast enough, the way Galileo was treated still brings Christianity into disrepute. It is not so much having to interpret the bible more and more generally, as specific interpretations being shown to be wrong. But I think this is a good thing, the more misinterpretations we sort out the better we can understand how God speaks to us in his word.

For example your quote was completely taken out of context, where the full quote is: "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." It is not referring to species development, as you have implied but referring to his patience in human kind to repent.

Not that far out of context, certainly Peter was speaking of people misunderstanding the timing of the Lord's return, but Peter is not simply saying God will take longer than that,but bases it on an understanding of the nature of God and God's relationship to time compared to ours. Not only that but Peter based his answer on a reference to Psalm 90, a psalm about Genesis and the creation. 2Pet 3:8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
Here is the passage Peter referred to, though he gave it in his own words.
Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.

I just wonder where this will stop, for example if someone in the scientific field proved tomorrow, one theory which exists, (known as the big crunch) that the universe has been expanding and shrinking continuously and has always been doing that, and will continue doing so. This suggests there is no need for a creator. Would Christians then decide that God is then the one not creating the universe but controlling its movements as it expands and shrinks.

A good question, though I cannot see science ever being able to show the cosmos has existed over an infinite series of expansion and contractions, possibly that a previous universe contracted before the present one emerged from the Big Bang (or Bounce), but not an infinite regression. There simply isn't any possible evidence. At the same time, I don't see that big a problem if it was shown to be true. God is outside time, is it any more difficult for God to be the creator of a cosmos infinitely long in time than one infinitely wide in breath? For someone outside the universe outside time as we know it, time in our universe is just another dimension, and God created it all. Incidentally, this is not a new problem but one theologians pondered in medieval times, they did not think the universe and matter always existed, as Greek philosophy claimed, but they did not see problem with God being creator if it was.

 

[MKJ]

There seem to be a few questions.

Why did God not make things perfect: This is interesting. One might equally ask why he didn't make us all appear as fully functioning adults - why go through the imperfect stages of fetus, child, or even old age? I think this can come by assuming that evolution must have a goal with all else only being important in relation to that. That isn't necessarily so - the creature that is not quite a horse is probably just as pleasing to God as a horse is.

Why must creatures be "selected" and some die? Why must they suffer?: Why must creatures eat other creatures? Why do we need to live in time? Why is there suffering? I think my questions are really what you seem to be asking, and they are not really evolution questions. But always remember that the Fall impacted all of creation and the cosmos.

Could the universe be endlessly contracting and expanding? I suppose so from a scientific perspective, though as I understand it, there would be no way to determine if this went on endlessly, or if it began at some particular point. Some might consider the philosophical question od infinite regression to be of interest here. But even an eternal universe does not exclude God - remember the ancient Greeks like Plato and Aristotle thought the world had always existed, and they still saw a need for a logical First Cause, even if not a temporal one.

Why do we always try to fit religion to science: This is something to be careful about, but it isn't always a bad thing. A person who uses "creation science" is fitting Scripture to creation since as much as a person who believes in an old universe and Earth. That is only natural. But science does change its ideas at times. But here is the thing - you do not need to hitch religion to any one scientific view. You do not generally need to make religious truths dependent on any scientific ideas, nor do you generally need to reject science on religion. If tomorrow we find out that evolution, which I think is a good theory, is mistaken, it will have little impact on my Christian belief.

We can't know and be sure every detail, and we need to learn to be content in that. That is what faith is about. Read you Bible to learn about the spiritual truths God wants us to know. Get information about rocks, or animals, or stars, from looking at them. Don't worry if how they relate is sometimes unclear - it would be surprising if that were not true.

 

[rs9896]

Oh, I'm sorry, I meant to say thousands of transitional fossils. I do believe in adaptation but not evolution.
Sorry about not understanding your last paragraph above.

I'm just wondering you mean by adaptation, and how that is different to evolution?

 

[rs9896]

If God wasn't all loving, we would not have a choice. Freewill gives us choices to be good or to be cruel. It is us who makes that choice.

I do philosophy at university and had to write an essay on free will. There are very strong arguments against whether we have free will at all. This includes a very strong argument against the compatibility of free will with God. That is if god is omnipotent and omniscient he has the knowledge of everything we have done are doing and are about to do, because he is all knowing. If he created us he must have known everything that we would end up choosing, suggesting we don't have free choice because he knew when he created us. You find its a paradox and suggests it wouldn't be possible to be all powerful, all knowing and all loving at the same time.

 

[texastig]

I'm just wondering you mean by adaptation, and how that is different to evolution?

This is my opinion. The word evolution has changed over time. I guess many people have different meanings about the word. I believe that the word evolution means that something came from primordial soup.

Adaptation refers to the process wherein certain groups or individuals (humans/animals) change their ways in order to be better suited to their environment and habitat.

 

[rs9896]

It goes back a lot further than that. When Copernicus came along and showed the earth went round the sun, we had to go back and reinterpret all the passages we thought said it is the sun that moves and the earth stands still. I would say the problem with Copernicus and Galileo is that the church didn't deal with the new science fast enough, the way Galileo was treated still brings Christianity into disrepute. It is not so much having to interpret the bible more and more generally, as specific interpretations being shown to be wrong. But I think this is a good thing, the more misinterpretations we sort out the better we can understand how God speaks to us in his word.

How do then know parts of the bible have been interpreted correctly? Will we ever have a fully correct interpretation of the bible? How do we know all of our interpretations aren't false and that the Bible doesn't just give symbolic interpretations of human nature and life.

A good question, though I cannot see science ever being able to show the cosmos has existed over an infinite series of expansion and contractions, possibly that a previous universe contracted before the present one emerged from the Big Bang (or Bounce), but not an infinite regression. There simply isn't any possible evidence. At the same time, I don't see that big a problem if it was shown to be true. God is outside time, is it any more difficult for God to be the creator of a cosmos infinitely long in time than one infinitely wide in breath? For someone outside the universe outside time as we know it, time in our universe is just another dimension, and God created it all. Incidentally, this is not a new problem but one theologians pondered in medieval times, they did not think the universe and matter always existed, as Greek philosophy claimed, but they did not see problem with God being creator if it was.

What I was trying to point out with this argument is that if you did have a universe which has existed for an infinite amount of time, there is no one point of creation, so no need for a creator. Also, outside the realms of time the cause and effect argument is not valid. As there is no one thing that occurs before another, outside of time, something that exists in these realms can't have been caused by something else before it, because there was no before.
I know this is getting very deep and confusing, but its food for thought. Ask me if you need any more clarification on my point.

 

[texastig]

I do philosophy at university and had to write an essay on free will. There are very strong arguments against whether we have free will at all. This includes a very strong argument against the compatibility of free will with God. That is if god is omnipotent and omniscient he has the knowledge of everything we have done are doing and are about to do, because he is all knowing. If he created us he must have known everything that we would end up choosing, suggesting we don't have free choice because he knew when he created us. You find its a paradox and suggests it wouldn't be possible to be all powerful, all knowing and all loving at the same time.

In my opinion, I don't see strong arguments for free will. We are free to murder kids and free to give life to kids, etc...
To have true love we must have free will because God's nature is not to force us because He is a gentleman.
God knows everything that we are going to do. But we don't and that's where free will comes in. It is for us to know.
From Carm: If God knows our free will choices, do we still have free will? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

Logically, God knowing what we are going to do does not mean that we can't do something else. It means that God simply knows what we have chosen to do ahead of time. Our freedom is not restricted by God's foreknowledge; our freedom is simply realized ahead of time by God. In this, our natural ability to make another choice has not been removed any more than my choice of what to write inside the parenthesis (hello) was removed by God who knew I would put the word "hello" in the parentheses before the universe was made. Before typing the word "hello," I pondered which word to write. My pondering was my doing and the choice was mine. How then was I somehow restricted in freedom when choosing what to write if God knew what I was going to do?
No matter what choice we freely make, it can be known by God, and His knowing it doesn't mean we aren't making a free choice.