How to deal with evolution?

[arunma]

Focus on the family has some really good resources for this stuff. We bought two DVDs recently.. One was called Icons Of Evolution, and the other was Unlocking the Mystery of Life. I'm tempted to just get your address and send them to you!! They are both commentated by highly respected scientists- all offering newly discovered GAPING holes in Evolution. The dvds aren't platforms for Creation- several of the scientists aren't even Christians... just people who have found proof in some sort of intelligent design. If you are interested- I'll send them to you.

Actually, I've read a book called Icons of Evolution. My guess is that the DVD is based on it. It was very interesting, in that it attacked evolution from a purely secular point of view (I don't think the book mentions God even once). Thus, a non-Christian could at the very least not accuse the author of promoting a religious agenda.

He brings up a great point, that pictures and diagrams, such as taxonomoic trees, misdrawn pictures of human embryos (the misdrawing of which is acknowledged by all scientists), and other such things, have come to be mistaken for actual evidence in favor of evolution. If nothing else, it should give the evolutionist pause to at least consider our case.

But it's interesting stuff. Thanks for bringing it up.

 

[ZiSunka]

Regarding my mathematical biology class, I seem to have found myself in a possible dilemma. As a Christian who believes that the Bible is the inerrent words of God, I obviously do not believe in evolution. Unfortunately, I may have to write a final paper on a topic regarding evolution. Now, I'm not one to preach creationism, since such discussions often cause the Gospel to take a back seat. But by no means does this mean that I actually believe in any form of evolution. Since Jesus must be the Lord of our lives in all areas, I obviously cannot compartmentalize religion and science, and ignore the words of God while in the classroom.

Fortunately, it happens to be the case that I could easily choose a topic which doesn't involve evolution, so this dilemma isn't too significant of an issue. But it has raised the question in my mind: how is a Christian to deal with this?

I don't really understand why evolution has to be dealt with at all. Why is it such a significant issue? It isn't like anyone has ever been convinced to follow Christ because some Christian talked to them about evolution, or that the world in general is sitting around talking about it and we have to stop them. If you can write your paper about something else, just do that without agonizing about how to deal with it. It's a non-issue.

 

[JPPT1974]

I don't really understand why evolution has to be dealt with at all. Why is it such a significant issue? It isn't like anyone has ever been convinced to follow Christ because some Christian talked to them about evolution, or that the world in general is sitting around talking about it and we have to stop them. If you can write your paper about something else, just do that without agonizing about how to deal with it. It's a non-issue.

Evolution doesn't belong in the Christian religion
I don't understand it at all either
Wonder why they put it with Christianity.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Yea, but then you're kind of going against what Genesis states. Now I'm not against 'microevolution' or the adaptation, because we have all sorts of dogs, cats, etc. But the part about the amoebe's or whatever they were being the start of life, and everything evolving from there, just doesn't make sense. How can things have enough mutations to make us what we have now? Granted, like I mentioned, we have the variation among us, dogs, cats, etc... but a fish turning into a land walker, becoming something else... etc. It just can't work that way. Biology class is a joke whenever we have to read about it.

The natural sciences do not involve themselves with either the supernatural or religion. The best, by far, explanation of the scientific data is that the more complex forms of life evolved over a VERY LONG TIME from less complex forms of life through the process of natural selection.

Also, if evolution like that did happen, then death would have been in the world before sin... which is going against God's word. Remember in Genesis, nothing alive (animals) died before sin came in. Everything was supported by the plant life on earth. Humans, animals; Dinosaurs, aquatic life, etc...

The first eleven chapters of Genesis belong to the genre of literature known today as epic literature. We know for certain that the flood depicted in Genesis is NOT an accurate account of an historic event. Therefore, there is no reason to interpret the rest of the first eleven chapters as an accurate account of historic events, and VERY FEW scholars of Genesis interpret them in that manner.

Also the Bible should be regarded as the innerant word of God. It was divinely inspired, he helped the people write it. So why would God lie? Wouldn't he have told us that we evolved? There's nowhere in the Bible that supports that.

The Bible makes no claim at all for inerrancy. And, of course, the earth is not flat with four corners covered by a dome containing the stars, the sun, several planets, and our moon; and the sun does not revolve around the earth. God did not bless us with only the Bible—He also blessed us with the Holy Spirit to help us to learn from the Bible in the light of the truth that He has chosen to make known to us through science.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

The first eleven chapters of Genesis belong to the genre of literature known today as epic literature. We know for certain that the flood depicted in Genesis is NOT an accurate account of an historic event. Therefore, there is no reason to interpret the rest of the first eleven chapters as an accurate account of historic events, and VERY FEW scholars of Genesis interpret them in that manner.



The Bible makes no claim at all for inerrancy. And, of course, the earth is not flat with four corners covered by a dome containing the stars, the sun, several planets, and our moon; and the sun does not revolve around the earth. God did not bless us with only the Bible—He also blessed us with the Holy Spirit to help us to learn from the Bible in the light of the truth that He has chosen to make known to us through science.

The flood, Noah, Adam, Eve and others are referred by Jesus and others in the N.T. as real people. If you are correct then Jesus and the others were wrong to treat not only the people in the first chapters of Genesis as real people but also the events.

Your statement about inerrancy is very telling. Many evolution believing Christians I run into also deny inerrancy. When the Bible loses its authority with a person then the person tends to buy into man made ideas more often which is all goo to man evolution is. Man to goo evolution isn't true and the evidence in the science world and also in the biblical world doesn't support it.

2 Peter 3:5-6 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.

John 17:17 Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The flood, Noah, Adam, Eve and others are referred by Jesus and others in the N.T. as real people. If you are correct then Jesus and the others were wrong to treat not only the people in the first chapters of Genesis as real people but also the events.

Yes, Jesus did refer to the flood and to Noah,

Matt. 24:37. "For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah.
38. "For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
39. and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Luke 17:26. "And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:
27. they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

In both of these two gospels Jesus uses the story of Noah and the Ark as an illustration of what the days will be like immediately before His Second Coming. He was not teaching a class on world history—he was using a well known Bible story as an illustration for his teaching regarding His Second Coming. Jesus, being the Son of God, knew very well that penguins can’t fly and that kangaroos can’t swim so He knew very well that the story was not an accurate account of an historic event. He simply used it for illustrative purposes.

We find a similar use of this illustration in the writings of Peter,

1 Peter 3:18. For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;
19. in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison,
20. who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.
21. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
22. who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.

In this passage Peter was not teaching a class on world history—he was teaching the salvific value of water baptism. I find it rather unfortunate that many Baptists get so caught up with Noah and the Ark in this passage that they completely miss what Peter was actually teaching about water baptism.

We find a similar situation in 1 Cor. 15:28-29,

28. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.
29. Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

Paul knew that baptizing people as surrogates of those who had died not having heard and believed the gospel was accomplished nothing, yet he used this incorrect belief that was commonly believed in Corinth as an argument for the resurrection of the dead.

Your statement about inerrancy is very telling. Many evolution believing Christians I run into also deny inerrancy. When the Bible loses its authority with a person then the person tends to buy into man made ideas more often which is all goo to man evolution is. Man to goo evolution isn't true and the evidence in the science world and also in the biblical world doesn't support it.

The doctrine that the Bible is totally inerrant is a man-made doctrine that is NOT supported by what the Bible says about itself. Luke, for example, wrote that he relied upon his own research to write his gospel and the book of Acts. He makes no mention at all of divine intervention in what he wrote,

Luke 1:1. Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
2. just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,
3. it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus;
4. so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

It is my personal conviction that Luke was anointed by the Holy Spirit as he wrote, but that is only my personal conviction. Luke’s gospel was almost for certain written after Paul wrote 2 Timothy, so 2 Tim. 3:16-17 can not be said to apply to it. And, of course, the language of 2 Tim. 3:16 is ambiguous in the Greek text and can also be translated,

Every scripture inspired by God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

Whether or not each of the four gospels were inspired by God is not taught anywhere in the Bible and any claim to any of them being inspired is speculation on the part of men. Personally, I believe that they were inspired, but I am certain that Jesus knew that penguins can’t fly and that kangaroos can’t swim and that He knew very well that the story of Noah’s Ark was not an accurate account of an historic event, but that he used the story for illustrative purposes just like He used parables for the purpose of illustration.

(All Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995, unless otherwise noted.)

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Whether or not each of the four gospels were inspired by God is not taught anywhere in the Bible and any claim to any of them being inspired is speculation on the part of men. Personally, I believe that they were inspired, but I am certain that Jesus knew that penguins can’t fly and that kangaroos can’t swim and that He knew very well that the story of Noah’s Ark was not an accurate account of an historic event, but that he used the story for illustrative purposes just like He used parables for the purpose of illustration.

The writings of the NT are several times called scripture. More then just writings they were the words of God written by man. As for kangaroos swimming there are answers out there. Your assuming some things using your evolution worldview mindset. Your assuming that the continents had already split. There are Ph. D. scientists in geology that would argue differently. Also you have to remember God brought the animals to Noah. He could have easily done this supertnaturally like he did many other things supernaturally through out history.

Here are some technical journals by creation believing scientists who have different views on plate tectonics. It makes interesting for geeks such as myself.

 

[98cwitr]

I was brought up to believe evolution all my life, and while I am beginning to refute it, I still cannot get over the fact that Chimps have 99% of the exact same DNA that we do. Maybe God just made them very similiar to us for a reason unknown to man. I can speculate all day long, I will never know while on this earth.

 

[catch21wide]

When it comes to the Bible, I have been taught to believe that it is the Word of God. Since it is the Word of God, I believe it to be inerrant. I don't believe in compromising the Bible. By believing in evolution, I would be compromising the Word of God and just don't do that. Humans, animals, plants, and the universe were created in His image. We don't have to know why chimps have almost the same genes as we do. God wanted them that way. When a scientist starts talking about how evolution is right, I just take Ph. D. and make it into an acronym= pompous human dummies. I don't say that to be mean, it's just what pops in my head at the time. The Bible was written by the supernatural inspiration of God. You can try and tell me it wasn't, but I will not go against the Word of God.If the Bible was not inspired by God, then why is it the only book in the world to have had 2,000 prophecies fulfilled. Until you answer that question with a good answer, don't try refuting how the Bible was written.

 

[SteelDisciple]

Regarding my mathematical biology class, I seem to have found myself in a possible dilemma. As a Christian who believes that the Bible is the inerrent words of God, I obviously do not believe in evolution. Unfortunately, I may have to write a final paper on a topic regarding evolution. Now, I'm not one to preach creationism, since such discussions often cause the Gospel to take a back seat. But by no means does this mean that I actually believe in any form of evolution. Since Jesus must be the Lord of our lives in all areas, I obviously cannot compartmentalize religion and science, and ignore the words of God while in the classroom.

Fortunately, it happens to be the case that I could easily choose a topic which doesn't involve evolution, so this dilemma isn't too significant of an issue. But it has raised the question in my mind: how is a Christian to deal with this?

The biggest mistake Christians mistake is thinking that Science is "bad". Fact is..Science is a tool like any other. It helps us to KNOW God more through his creations.
I do believe (as it is PROVEN) that our bodies do change to our enviroments. That's a fact. It's science. And it's how God made it to be. Science and God work hand in hand...science is merely the "HOW" to God's creations.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The writings of the NT are several times called scripture. More then just writings they were the words of God written by man. As for kangaroos swimming there are answers out there. Your assuming some things using your evolution worldview mindset. Your assuming that the continents had already split. There are Ph. D. scientists in geology that would argue differently. Also you have to remember God brought the animals to Noah. He could have easily done this supertnaturally like he did many other things supernaturally through out history.

Here are some technical journals by creation believing scientists who have different views on plate tectonics. It makes interesting for geeks such as myself.

In my professional opinion, Answers in Genesis is a fraudulent, pseudo-Christian cult that has done immeasurable damage to both the Christian faith and the natural sciences by making Christians appear to be intellectually challenged baboons in the late stages of dementia and by making scientists appear to be high school dropouts. Their handling the Holy Scriptures demonstrates a most severe disrespect for them and the God who inspired them. Their handing of science belittles the life time of learning of hundreds of thousands of scientists all over the world and exalts a pack of fools who have been so severely blinded by the devil himself that they cannot see the significance of the data staring them in the face. Their so-called scientific papers demonstrate a most pathetic ignorance of the natural sciences and should most definitely not be confused with the real thing.

I respect the right of everyone to believe what they choose to believe, but to willfully and deliberately distort the facts in order to defend one’s personal and grossly ignorant interpretation of Genesis 1-11, as is the habit of the people behind organizations like Answers in Genesis, is a sin of a most horrendous magnitude.

I challenge you to name even one professor of geology or biology teaching in a university anywhere in the world today that believes that the earth is less than millions years old and that the tectonic plates forming our continents today pulled apart from each other in the last ten thousand years.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

When it comes to the Bible, I have been taught to believe that it is the Word of God. Since it is the Word of God, I believe it to be inerrant. I don't believe in compromising the Bible. By believing in evolution, I would be compromising the Word of God and just don't do that. Humans, animals, plants, and the universe were created in His image. We don't have to know why chimps have almost the same genes as we do. God wanted them that way. When a scientist starts talking about how evolution is right, I just take Ph. D. and make it into an acronym= pompous human dummies. I don't say that to be mean, it's just what pops in my head at the time. The Bible was written by the supernatural inspiration of God. You can try and tell me it wasn't, but I will not go against the Word of God.If the Bible was not inspired by God, then why is it the only book in the world to have had 2,000 prophecies fulfilled. Until you answer that question with a good answer, don't try refuting how the Bible was written.

I was taught to believe the same thing, but when I read and studied the Bible for myself I learned that the Bible does NOT teach some of things that I was taught by men. The Bible makes no claim whatsoever of inerrancy nor does it make any claim to be written, word for word, by God Himself. I believe Paul, not because he claimed to be writing under the inspiration of God (a claim that he never made), but because of the quality of his personal character and the part that his writings have played in the salvation of millions of men, women and children around the world. I believe Luke because, when everyone else had deserted Paul, Luke remained faithful to him and demonstrated that he was a Christian of the highest personal character,

2 Tim. 4:9. Make every effort to come to me soon;
10. for Demas, having loved this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica; Crescens has gone to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia.
11. Only Luke is with me. Pick up Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for service. (NASB, 1995)

And I believe the Bible as a whole, when read it in the light of the wisdom and knowledge that God has blessed us with, because of the very nature of it. I also believe that, because the Biblical writers were inspired by God, the Bible deserves to be very carefully and very prayerfully read and studied by each one of us. I also believe that God has blessed us with scientists to help all of us live healthier and more productive lives and to help us come to a fuller knowledge of Him, His creation, and His message to us in the Bible that He has given to us.

 

[arunma]

Almost everyone here, including myself, will likely disagree with PrincetonGuy. But even as we do so, I would like to remind my fellow evangelical Christians of one thing. As we state our reasons for disbelieving in evolution, let us please not viciously attack him. All to often, theologically orthodox Christians will label dissenters as "liberals," and accuse them of being false Christians.

Remember: a Christian who believes in some incorrect doctrine is not necessarily a false believer. As we explain to PrincetonGuy why we reject evolution, let us please remember to do so in a spirit of love and not contempt (not that anyone here is yet guilty of this).

 

[LsforLove]

I think you have a wonderful oppertunity to write a paper on creation and the scientifice evidence that back it up...you can write a paper on the evolutionist theories that have been disproven...There are many great websites you can use....pm me if you need any.

if your paper is well written and throughly reserched, if it is scientifice in its content and not just writtien "I believe cause the Bible says"....but say I believe the Bible is true when it says, and here is the scientific evidences to support that belief. If it is written acoridnign the the classes specifications then it has too be graded on those same specification and you cant get a bad greade just because your teacher does not agree. I think it is a great opertunity to speak up for truth!!!

While I don’t agree with your stand point of YECism. I have to applauded your advice and what your advice says. To many times fundamentalist (not just Christians but everybody) assert that they are correct because of what they believe. Yet very rarely can provide evidence or reasons to believe them. I think it is important to provide evidence for what ever you believe.
To the OP the above advice is very good. However some teachers/professors will dock you no matter how well or correctly your research is documented and laid out. Make sure your teacher is willing to listen to ideas that he/she does not agree with because if they are not it is quite likely that you will not attain as high as a mark as you otherwise would if you just went with the flow.

 

[LsforLove]

In my professional opinion, Answers in Genesis is a fraudulent, pseudo-Christian cult that has done immeasurable damage to both the Christian faith and the natural sciences by making Christians appear to be intellectually challenged baboons in the late stages of dementia and by making scientists appear to be high school dropouts. Their handling the Holy Scriptures demonstrates a most severe disrespect for them and the God who inspired them. Their handing of science belittles the life time of learning of hundreds of thousands of scientists all over the world and exalts a pack of fools who have been so severely blinded by the devil himself that they cannot see the significance of the data staring them in the face. Their so-called scientific papers demonstrate a most pathetic ignorance of the natural sciences and should most definitely not be confused with the real thing.

I respect the right of everyone to believe what they choose to believe, but to willfully and deliberately distort the facts in order to defend one’s personal and grossly ignorant interpretation of Genesis 1-11, as is the habit of the people behind organizations like Answers in Genesis, is a sin of a most horrendous magnitude.

I challenge you to name even one professor of geology or biology teaching in a university anywhere in the world today that believes that the earth is less than millions years old and that the tectonic plates forming our continents today pulled apart from each other in the last ten thousand years.

Dr. Jay Johnson
Doctorate in entomology works part time at WSU and teaches at a private high school.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Dr. Jay Johnson
Doctorate in entomology works part time at WSU and teaches at a private high school.

Working part time at WSU and teaching in a private high school comes very far short of being a professor of geology or biology teaching in a university.

 

[LsforLove]

Working part time at WSU and teaching in a private high school comes very far short of being a professor of geology or biology teaching in a university.

Not when you are teaching Masters Courses. Just because he feels called to work with teenaged children does not negate the fact that he is not the primary professor of 500+ level classes at a major state university

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Almost everyone here, including myself, will likely disagree with PrincetonGuy. But even as we do so, I would like to remind my fellow evangelical Christians of one thing. As we state our reasons for disbelieving in evolution, let us please not viciously attack him. All to often, theologically orthodox Christians will label dissenters as "liberals," and accuse them of being false Christians.

Remember: a Christian who believes in some incorrect doctrine is not necessarily a false believer. As we explain to PrincetonGuy why we reject evolution, let us please remember to do so in a spirit of love and not contempt (not that anyone here is yet guilty of this).

You have an excellent point here! On another Christian message board on which there are hundreds of registered Baptist members those who post in favor of the theory of evolution are castigated in a most vicious, libelous, and hateful manner on a regular basis, and the moderators and the administrators join right in, betraying their own members and feeding them to the wolves.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Not when you are teaching Masters Courses. Just because he feels called to work with teenaged children does not negate the fact that he is not the primary professor of 500+ level classes at a major state university

WSU does not list a Jay Johnson as being a faculty member.

 

[arunma]

You have an excellent point here! On another Christian message board on which there are hundreds of registered Baptist members those who post in favor of the theory of evolution are castigated in a most vicious, libelous, and hateful manner on a regular basis, and the moderators and the administrators join right in, betraying their own members and feeding them to the wolves.

Well I'm sorry that you and many other brothers have experienced this from people who claim to be fellow Christians. Such behavior is reprehensible. Make no mistake, I do believe that evolution should be refuted on a Scriptural basis. And believers who accept evolution ought to be gently persuaded, if possible. But I do not believe that they should be put out of the church, or treated a second-class Christians. It says,

I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them. (Romans 16:17)
​

Now what is the doctrine that we have been taught? First and foremost, we have been taught about Christ, who was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life, was crucified on the cross for the forgiveness of sin, and was resurrected by God. We have been taught that the teaching of the Apostles is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and that the Prophets of Israel also spoke by the Holy Spirit. I think that a person who believes this can rightly be called a Christian, and anyone who tries to divide Christians by other means is causing unnecessary division in the church.

There are also creeds that Christians have invented over the centuries to define and the faith. Such things as the Apostle's Creed, Nicene Creed, and the Westminster Confession are all man-made tools that help us define the Christian faith.

So what about evolutionists in the church? I think they should be allowed to live and fellowship with us, so long as they believe in the fundamentals of the faith. On one hand, I do wish that they would abstain from teaching evolutionist doctrine in the church. However, what separates Christians from extremist cults, Islam, and other such things, is that we do not suppress dissenters. I think that discussion on the issue is healthy. And I am confident that if we are all believers in Christ (even the evolutionists), most people will be persuaded to believe that the Mosaic creation account is historically accurate. I am by no means afraid of discussing evolution.

There is one thing that troubles me about evolution. People who believe in it tend to also believe in other, more severe heterodox doctrines. For example, believers in evolution tend to claim that people can be saved apart from Christ, and I believe that such teaching is very dangerous. But even in this case, it is not evolution itself which is dangerous.

Is evolution wrong? Yes. But we ought to accept people who believe in it as brothers, because there are real heresies from which we must defend the church. Such things as sexual immorality, religious pluralism, and homosexuality threaten the modern church. And compared to such things, evolution is not by itself of much concern. Therefore I wish that Christians would persuade evolutionists to believe in Biblical creation, not out of hatred or contempt, but out of love. Those who believe in evolution, but who hold to the fundamentals of the faith, are genuinely brothers in Christ. So let us treat them as brothers, and not as Gentiles.