Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[throughfiierytrial]

You speak of rejecting "much of what Christ taught." Yet Jesus s[pent relatively little time teaching about the Garden or the flood or Cain. When He did so it was in terms of making his message understandable to his listeners, all of whom believed that those things actually existed. Do I deny the miracles performed by Jesus? Of course not. Do I believe in a literal Garden of Eden? No. Do I see any conflict there? No, of course not.

Now, once again, are you saying taht a Christian cannot believe in evolution?

If we believe Scripture we will not be deceived...Jesus says watch out that no one deceives you...Matthew 7:15 and Matthew 24:4. If we aren't busy loving the world we'll get our priorities straight pretty quick.

 

[kmrichard7]

In my Christian, only mildly educated on the matter, opinion... I find certain aspects of evolution to be a bit far fetched.
We have evolved as a species but from primates is just too far fetched for me. Always has been.

 

[Archivist]

If we believe Scripture we will not be deceived...Jesus says watch out that no one deceives you...Matthew 7:15 and Matthew 24:4. If we aren't busy loving the world we'll get our priorities straight pretty quick.

And exactly how is believing that evolution has occurred and is still occurring being "deceived"?

 

[Archivist]

In my Christian, only mildly educated on the matter, opinion... I find certain aspects of evolution to be a bit far fetched. We have evolved as a species but from primates is just too far fetched for me. Always has been.

Would you prefer if we had evolved from giraffes?

 

[Armoured]

Get serious! and that is a derogatory remark toward Jesus just so you can have a laugh. Notice you skipped over all the literalism quoted. These passages all point to faith...down through the ages...OT to NT times. In many respects we as a people are growing more ignorant not more knowledgeable over time. Time has darkened our knowledge of God which is true ignorance.

Translation: don't point out the glaring flaws in my argument.

 

[KWCrazy]

In so doing, we must cast aside the preexisting bias that everything in Scripture has to be true, that everything happened just the way the Bible says it happened.

So it is your intent to interpret the Scriptures not with the revelation of the Holy Spirit, but rather through the limited understanding of a non-believer who denies that veracity of the Scriptures? How can one possibly come to the right conclusion with such a premise?

It is readily apparent that it stands in stark contradiction to modern scientific accounts.

Yes, as does EVERY theory of creation because origination is impossible. That's why God chose to create as He did; because it demonstrates the absolute authority He has over the universe.

If we stay within the confines of the fundamentalist box, science is clearly a thing of the Devil, and that's the end of it.

Sophistry. Science is the study of the PHYSICAL world around us. It can neither reject nor affirm the supernatural creation of anything.

After all, who believes that the earth is really flat, that everything revolves around the earth, etc.?

The Bible makes no such claims. It uses terminology of the day such as the four corners of the world, but that expression is still used; meaning east, west, north and south; not that the world is flat.

It is my position that there are two contradictory accounts.

Please explain Genesis 2:1 with this claim in mind. Genesis 2 deals with the formation of man, which happened on day 6. The animals which were brought to Adam were already formed. The creation was, as Genesis 2:1 proclaims, complete.

There is the pluperfect theory.... There is no, repeat no, pluperfect tense in Hebrew.

This is the limitation of the Hebrew language, not God's limitation. Biblical scholars have concluded that Genesis two regards the origination of man which was the final creation after the rest of the universe. It goes into greater detail of the events regarding Adam's beginning.
The final word on this matter, however, should really be given to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In Matthew chapter 19, verses 4 and 5, the Lord is addressing the subject of marriage, and says: “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?”

Notice how in the very same statement, Jesus refers to both Genesis 1 (verse 27b: ‘male and female he created them’) and Genesis 2 (verse 24: ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.’). Obviously, by combining both in this way, He in no way regarded them as separate, contradictory accounts.
source

If we are fusing these accounts together, then there is a woman created in Gen. 1, and at the same time as Adam, who is not named, and who obviously exists in addition to Eve. Who is she? Her name is Lilith and she is Adam's first wife. She was domineering and liked riding on top of Adam when they had sex. Adam didn't like this and neither did God, as women are to be submissive. So God gave Adam a second wife, Eve, who at least stayed underneath during sex. Lilith then got mad, ran away, became a witch, and goes around terrorizing children, so that it was common to find a crib with “God save up from Lilith” written on it. Now, unless you believe in the existence of preAdamites, and the fundamentalist box does not and most Christians do not either, then this whole situation is absolutely ridiculous.

That's why we are not permitted to add or detract from the Scriptures; because nonsense like that gets taught. Frankly, that sounds like something Mohammed made up. He was always writing about sex.

Another problem with the Genesis account is that it does not make it clear how God creates. Some will say it definitely means creatio ex nihilo. But God created Adam out of dust, not out of nothing. God created Eve out of Adam's rib, not out of nothing.

God had already created the dust.
It fits in with what would come later; "From dust you came, and to dust you will return." Man's body is temporary. The earth lasts until God destroys it.

 

[KWCrazy]

And exactly how is believing that evolution has occurred and is still occurring being "deceived"?

You believe in something which did not happen, which is not happening and which never can happen. We see only adaptation; a conservative process. There is not increasing complexity. Nothing evolves into anything else.

 

[Archivist]

You believe in something which did not happen, which is not happening and which never can happen. We see only adaptation; a conservative process. There is not increasing complexity. Nothing evolves into anything else.

Science says otherwise.

 

[KWCrazy]

We've seen evolution multiple times. You can test it yourself with any imperfect replicator.

So evolution, then, means only what you want it to mean. My computer drops a file, therefore evolution is true. Gotcha.

 

[KWCrazy]

Science says otherwise.

What does science say about a man walking on water, raising the dead, healing the blind, dying on a cross and coming back to life on the third day?

 

[Archivist]

What does science say about a man walking on water, raising the dead, healing the blind, dying on a cross and coming back to life on the third day?

Apparently you don't bother reading what others write as I already addressed this. I have no doubt that Jesus performed miracles. Science doesn't prove or disprove them, that is why they are called miracles. However I aslo believe in evolution. I see no conflict between those two beliefs.

You still ahve not answered my question: Are you saying that a Christian cannot believe in evolution? It is an easy question, you should be able to answer it.

 

[Armoured]

You believe in something which did not happen, which is not happening and which never can happen. We see only adaptation; a conservative process. There is not increasing complexity. Nothing evolves into anything else.

Tell that to the nylon eating bacteria.

 

[Extraneous]

Tell that to the nylon eating bacteria.

And Lucy as well.

 

[KWCrazy]

You speak of rejecting "much of what Christ taught." Yet Jesus spent relatively little time teaching about the Garden or the Flood or Cain. When He did so it was in terms of making His message understandable to His listeners, all of whom believed that those things actually existed.

So it's your position that He was lying to them; that He knew most of the Old Testament was false and yet He chose not to reveal the truth to them?
What did Jesus ACTUALLY teach about the Old Testament?
Source of Authority

1. 1. When confronted by Satan, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament as a source of authority by stating, "It is written," (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10).
2. Imperishability
   1. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished," (NASB, Matt. 5:18).
3. Unbreakability
   1. "The Scripture cannot be broken," (NASB, Jn. 10:35).
4. Source of Doctrinal Authority
   1. Jesus appealed to Scripture when correcting false doctrine stating, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God," (NASB, Matt. 22:29).
5. Truthfulness
   1. "Your word is truth," (NASB, Jn. 17:17).
6. Historical Reliability
   1. Jesus affirmed the historical existence of Jonah (Matt. 12:40), Noah (Matt. 24:37-38), and Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4-6).
7. Scientific Reliability
   1. Jesus affirmed that God created the world (Mk. 13:19, cf. Matt. 19:4).
8. Old Testament Canonicity
   1. Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
   2. Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
   3. Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).

source

Now, once again, are you saying that the Scriptures are false; that Adam evolved and was NOT created by God; that death did NOT come into the world through sin; that the very premise behind humanity needing a savior is false? Evolution requires that you choose between the word of God and the theory of man. Which do you choose?

 

[KWCrazy]

Tell that to the nylon eating bacteria.

You know what? I no longer eat baby food! My diet has changed. I AM EVOLVED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Archivist]

So it's your position that He was lying to them; that He knew most of the Old Testament was false and yet He chose not to reveal the truth to them?
What did Jesus ACTUALLY teach about the Old Testament?
Source of Authority

1. 1. When confronted by Satan, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament as a source of authority by stating, "It is written," (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10).
2. Imperishability
   1. "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished," (NASB, Matt. 5:18).
3. Unbreakability
   1. "The Scripture cannot be broken," (NASB, Jn. 10:35).
4. Source of Doctrinal Authority
   1. Jesus appealed to Scripture when correcting false doctrine stating, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God," (NASB, Matt. 22:29).
5. Truthfulness
   1. "Your word is truth," (NASB, Jn. 17:17).
6. Historical Reliability
   1. Jesus affirmed the historical existence of Jonah (Matt. 12:40), Noah (Matt. 24:37-38), and Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4-6).
7. Scientific Reliability
   1. Jesus affirmed that God created the world (Mk. 13:19, cf. Matt. 19:4).
8. Old Testament Canonicity
   1. Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
   2. Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
   3. Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).

source

Now, once again, are you saying that the Scriptures are false; that Adam evolved and was NOT created by God; that death did NOT come into the world through sin; that the very premise behind humanity needing a savior is false? Evolution requires that you choose between the word of God and the theory of man. Which do you choose?

No, I never said that Jesus lied to anyone. Please do not accuse me of saying things that I never said. I clearly stated that Jesus spoke in terms that his listeners would understand. They believed in these things therefore He spoke about them.

Still waiting for you to answer my question: Are you saying th t a Christian cannot believe in evolution?

 

[KWCrazy]

Still waiting for you to answer my question: Are you saying th t a Christian cannot believe in evolution?

Answer mine and I'll answer yours.
Are you saying that the Scriptures are false; that Adam evolved and was NOT created by God; that death did NOT come into the world through sin; that the very premise behind humanity needing a savior is false? Both the Bible and evolution cannot be true. Man cannot be created by God from the dust of the earth and simultaneously evolve over billions of years from plankton. Evolution requires that you choose between the word of God and the theory of man. Which do you choose? Where do you put your faith, in the the word of God, or the theories of man?

 

[Archivist]

Answer mine and I'll answer yours.
Are you saying that the Scriptures are false; that Adam evolved and was NOT created by God; that death did NOT come into the world through sin; that the very premise behind humanity needing a savior is false? Both the Bible and evolution cannot be true. Man cannot be created by God from the dust of the earth and simultaneously evolve over billions of years from plankton. Evolution requires that you choose between the word of God and the theory of man. Which do you choose? Where do you put your faith, in the the word of God, or the theories of man?

No, I asked first, some 20 posts ago.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

No, I never said that Jesus lied to anyone. Please do not accuse me of saying things that I never said. I clearly stated that Jesus spoke in terms that his listeners would understand. They believed in these things therefore He spoke about them.

Still waiting for you to answer my question: Are you saying th t a Christian cannot believe in evolution?

I think a Christian can certainly believe in evolution, but the real question is this: why would a Christian abandon the authority of Scripture in favor of theories from ungodly men? Just because people say evolution is a scientific fact doesn't mean it is one. I can believe in a heliocentric model of our solar system without compromising my belief in Scripture, but evolution puts millions of years of death and mutation before the creation of Adam and Eve; it undermines the Scriptures in many ways. I suppose many who call themselves Christian believe in evolution because "well, the scientists said it and the schools teach it, so it must be true." Why don't you start questioning these scientists instead of God and His word? Call me a fool, but I believe we were intelligently created by an All-powerful God. That's what people have believed for thousands of years up until the last two centuries, and now people think we are nothing more than mutated apes.

 

[Archivist]

I think a Christian can certainly believe in evolution, but the real question is this: why would a Christian abandon the authority of Scripture in favor of theories from ungodly men? Just because people say evolution is a scientific fact doesn't mean it is one. I can believe in a heliocentric model of our solar system without compromising my belief in Scripture, but evolution puts millions of years of death and mutation before the creation of Adam and Eve; it undermines the Scriptures in many ways. I suppose many who call themselves Christian believe in evolution because "well, the scientists said it and the schools teach it, so it must be true." Why don't you start questioning these scientists instead of God and His word? Call me a fool, but I believe we were intelligently created by an All-powerful God. That's what people have believed for thousands of years up until the last two centuries, and now people think we are nothing more than mutated apes.

I don't see any conflict. I read Genesis as an allegory that tells us that God created everything, but not a scientific journal that tell us exactly how He did it.

BTW, here is the statement from my denomination on evolution and the Bible:

"The ELCA has not officially taken a position about evolution. The ELCA teaches that the scriptures witness that all of life is a gift of God. However, the scriptures do not say, for example, how God's creating word, "Let there be...," brings creatures into being. Lutheran tradition has respected the work of the natural sciences in investigating phenomena in the natural world and explaining how they work and how they originated. Because our knowledge both of God and of other things is partial (I Corinthians 13:9), what is accepted at any one time as valid scientific knowledge and theory can be either added to or corrected by further scientific investigation and better theories to explain the phenomena we see in the world."

I see that as a reasonable statement on the issue.