Can you be both a Christian and an Evolutionist?

[Petros]

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

I tend to sit back and let these discussions blow past like the incipient funnel clouds that ran over my head one afternoon in East :Lansing, bout I will just toss in my two lepta worth.

We as God-seekers know as data the world we have been given and the written understandings of others, some of which we as individuals or churches take as more authoritative. And we know quite a bit which is nonetheless less than the average iceberg tip [as in the sermon to Job]. Much of the rest is yet unguessed, much is [scripturally explicitly] sealed up, much simply will not fit finite brains.

We as scientists [I have the background and credentials to prove it] know as data the parts we can see of the world we inhabit and the analyses, conclusions, and theories of others, some of which we as individuals or professional communities view as more insightful. And we have quite a few publishable theories which still are less than the average iceberg tip. Much is unguessable even if we assume rapid advances in technology - most of science deals with averages, statistics, approximations, and we cannot tell the state of Schroedinger's cat NOW.

Much of theology, much of science [I know all too well], much of the debates between theology and the other sciences comes down to kids squabbling over whose scenario for the game is better.

De gustibus non disputandum until you are both touching the same piece of elephant.

To respond to the original point - do I believe the universe was started and is maintained by a divine entity outside said universe? Yes.

Do I believe some theory of evolution to be correct [my brother who is in the field will tell you there is more than one]? I believe the data so far available are not incompatible with some theories of biological evolution.

I believe that maintaining those statements are incompatible is precisely the same as the one blind man fighting with the other whether with fists or journal articles over is the elephant more like a tree or like a big snake.

[Jon-Marc]

I just read that scientists are so sure that the debate between creation and evolution will soon be solved that it will prove evolution to be true and destroy the belief in creation. Don't you just love their arrogance and belief in their misguided theories? One can prove the truth but not a lie. People might choose to believe lies (like evolution), but you can't turn a lie into the truth by millions of people believing it any more than you turn the truth into a lie by denying it. God's truth will win out in the end.

[Thulcandrian]

Jon-Marc, people have predicted before that atheism would crush Christianity, and it hasn't happened yet. I doubt any answers about the universe's origins will ever be unanimously accepted.

As for the original question, I don't think the description given us in Genesis leaves any room for commonly held theories of evolution. Could God have used gradual changes to create the world over the course of millions of years? Certainly. but if He did, I don't think He would have left us with the six-day, spoken-into-existence account in Genesis 1.

[Sunhappy]

I look at this rather simply. I do believe that man and woman were unique creations of Almighty God. However, there is so much overwhelming evidence of evolution in lower species in both animal and plant life that one could easily believe that God designed much of His creation to evolve this way. The time line is almost irrelavent. Who cares if it took seven literal days or seven billion years? In God's world there is no such thing as time anyway. The only thing that matters is our walk with God and Christ, and how we do as stewards of the earth and a friend to mankind.

[natman]

there is so much overwhelming evidence of evolution in lower species in both animal and plant life that one could easily believe that God designed much of His creation to evolve this way.

Where is the "overhelming" evidence? While studying biology in college, what I saw evidence of "devolution" (the loss of DNA information and physical complexity), not "evolution" (the increase of DNA data and physical complexity). We see this in the loss of entire species and sub-species due to extinctions every day.

The only thing that matters is our walk with God and Christ, and how we do as stewards of the earth and a friend to mankind.

I think that it matters greatly that we recognize that we are "specifically" designed and created by God rather than by a chance collection of molecules or from some lesser creation. If we see ourselves as "evolving" from some lesser, non-human and therefore "non-image and likeness of God", then we can and have justified the destruction of ourselves and others since we are no more than more advanced "animals".

[Petros]

"god made the integers", said Kronecker, "All else is the work of man" "But one thing is needful," said Jesus.


I was struck this week again and again by how simple the Law, the Faith, the Walk are before we are turned loose on them. Adam and Eve got one rule, Moses got 10, and Jesus pointed out that thety are really just two looked at from the right angle. Even the Credal formulae are remarkably simple for the first few centuries.



We make long lists of Things to be Believed and Things NOT to be Believed, Things to be Said and Things NOT to be Said, and Things to be Done and Things NOT to be Done - and there is no health in us.



I cannot think that believing this and doubting that matters. If we ARE hearing and following the Christ, evolution or transubstantiation or deconstruction are not going to lead us to destroy and be destroyed.



And if we are NOT hearing and following him, "right beliefs" are not going to keep us from destruction.

[Johannes_1965]

There are two notions of evolution.
It seems to be evident that a development in time of individual plants, animals and human beings really exists. Also the adaption (evolution) of species to changing enviromental conditions really exists within limited borders. This is at the basis of the breeding of new biological cultures or races. Different sorts of dogs, cats or grain come from this natural process of micro evolution that can be steered by man and explained by Darwinian principles.

But when we say “evolutionism” we speak of Darwin’s concept of the origin of species or of the modern concept of the origin of the universe through a merely natural, undirected process. All that exists would be the result of natural laws and mere chance, of unpredictable little changes.

That (neo) Darwinian idea of evolution has turned out to be wrong and has turned into an ideology because it is taught and firmly believed even though it contradicts reason and scientific evidence. Never has the emergence of a really new species or biological plan been observed! It is in direct contradiction to Christian faith in the Creator, who is replaced by chance, by random mutations. That’s the point of evolutionism: we want that God doesn’t exist and that we are ourselves the creator who may then change the rules as we want.

The scientific evidence points to “intelligent design” of species and the universe, but science can’t say anything about that intelligent origin.

As Christians we have no difficulty to identify the intelligent source with God, the Creator of heaven and the earth, who reveals himself and speaks to us in the Bible. This identification is not any longer part of natural science. It’s our reasonable faith: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.” (John 1,1-5)

Johannes

[Ramblinman]

If we make the a priori assumption that there either is no God or no divine hand in the course of natural history, then we are left asking ourselves, "how did all things come to be?"

It is only logical that if the plants and animals were not steered toward their present form nor created in their present form, then the only remaining forces in the universe are random mutations coupled with the tendency of the less-fit to die out and the more-fit to multiply.

As you pointed out earlier, these two forces still cannot account for the great leaps forward between the major taxa.
In our generation, we have learned more about genetics and it is no longer possible to fabricate "just so" stories to account for blind evolution of ever higher and more complicated organisms.

The only reasonable conclusion is that there is an outside force exerted by an unseen hand that results in the complex and diverse biological world we see. The logical thing to do in the face of a collapsed paradigm is to abandon it and seek a new paradigm that involves a creation and a Creator, but human pride being what it is, that is a hard thing to achieve.

Those who heard this asked, "Who then can be saved?"
Jesus replied, "What is impossible with men is possible with God." Luke 18:26-27

[Johannes_1965]

I just read that scientists are so sure that the debate between creation and evolution will soon be solved that it will prove evolution to be true and destroy the belief in creation. Don't you just love their arrogance and belief in their misguided theories? One can prove the truth but not a lie...

In fact, the essence of evolutionism is already in the Bible. Probably you won’t find my quotation in your Bible edition because it’s from the Book of Wisdom, one of seven “deuterocanonical” books that have been removed by Martin Luther because they are written in Greek, have no Hebrew original and therefore are not in the Jewish Hebrew scriptures. So listen to this text from about the first century before Christ if it doesn’t sound quite modern:

“For they reasoned unsoundly, saying to themselves, "Short and sorrowful is our life, and there is no remedy when a man comes to his end, and no one has been known to return from Hades.
Because we were born by mere chance, and hereafter we shall be as though we had never been; because the breath in our nostrils is smoke, and reason is a spark kindled by the beating of our hearts.
When it is extinguished, the body will turn to ashes, and the spirit will dissolve like empty air.
Our name will be forgotten in time and no one will remember our works; our life will pass away like the traces of a cloud, and be scattered like mist that is chased by the rays of the sun and overcome by its heat.
For our allotted time is the passing of a shadow, and there is no return from our death, because it is sealed up and no one turns back.” (Wis 2,1-5)...
“Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them, and they did not know the secret purposes of God, nor hope for the wages of holiness, nor discern the prize for blameless souls; for God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of his own eternity, but through the devil's envy death entered the world, and those who belong to his party experience it.” (Wis 2,21-24)

[Bare_Truth]

..... In fact, the essence of evolutionism is already in the Bible. Probably you won’t find my quotation in your Bible edition because it’s from the Book of Wisdom, one of seven “deuterocanonical” books ......

Johannes,
Just to be sure, I had to look up the word Deuterocanonical

deu·ter·o·ca·non·i·cal
adjective
of, pertaining to, or constituting a second canon.

Although you may be using a more technically precise term I think the term "Apocrypha" would be more widely recognized here. That being said, I am not sure that Martin Luther is the one to be entirely credited for its exclusion from protestant Bibles.

Additionally, the quotation you made is a bit confusing because it does not designate the presumed author of the statement nor does it indicate who it is supposedly attributing the viewpoint to.

But all the forgoing is a bit of a digression, because the entire passage you cite seems to not be referring to anything relevant to evolution but rather addresses the question of "Is there an afterlife?". It seems to be describing the belief that this physical life that we now enjoy, (or endure), is the only existence we individually will ever have. In that respect, it seems to describe a belief that I have heard and read was held by the Sadducees . E.g.

Matthew 22:
23 ¶The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, .....

Acts 23:
8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both ....

Perhaps I am missing something or perhaps the passage you quoted is not the one you intended to quote.

[Johannes_1965]

...
But all the forgoing is a bit of a digression, because the entire passage you cite seems to not be referring to anything relevant to evolution but rather addresses the question of "Is there an afterlife?". It seems to be describing the belief that this physical life that we now enjoy, (or endure), is the only existence we individually will ever have. In that respect, it seems to describe a belief that I have heard and read was held by the Sadducees . E.g.

Matthew 22:
23 ¶The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, .....

Acts 23:
8 For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the Pharisees confess both ....

Perhaps I am missing something or perhaps the passage you quoted is not the one you intended to quote.

Bare_Truth, the group of the seven Greek books in the OT belongs to every Catholic Bible. Therefore they are not called Apocrypha (that made it not into the Bible), but deuterocanonical: they belong to the second canon of Greek books and not to the first one of Hebrew books. That's just the Catholic terminology.

As for the "authors" of the quote, they are called "ungodly men", or the wicked: "But ungodly men by their words and deeds summoned death; considering him a friend, they pined away, and they made a covenant with him, because they are fit to belong to his party." (Wis 1,16)

I referred the verses not to the really existing biological micro-evolution, but to the ideology of evolutionism. It is marked by the absence or conscious exclusion of God, which gives the kind of reasoning I've quoted: we are born of mere chance, no eternal life but only complex matter exists, thus no sense and the necessity to make the most out of this short, passing life.

As I was into this I recognize it as an evolutionist reasoning. I put the quotation of Jon-Mark in the beginning because it reflects, too, the arrogant spirit of “knowing it better” and “abolishing the hypothesis of God” in evolutionism. I hope it became clearer now.

Johannes

[natman]

It seems to be evident that a development in time of individual plants, animals and human beings really exists.

I think that a close examination of what we ACTUALLY see is a gradual destruction (loss of already existent data) or "de-evolution" over time. What I am saying is that we are seeing exactly the OPPOSITE of what the evolutionists are saying we are seeing. We see thousands and millions of species and subspecies go into extinction every decade. And what appear to be "new" species are merely expressions of exisiting data within and exisiting subspecies. We do not have any examples of "progressive" evolution in which NEW data is being added, as demonstrated by all of the "missing links". They are missing because they are non-existent.

Also the adaption (evolution) of species to changing enviromental conditions really exists within limited borders. This is at the basis of the breeding of new biological cultures or races. Different sorts of dogs, cats or grain come from this natural process of micro evolution that can be steered by man and explained by Darwinian principles.

This is what Darwin noticed in the Galopogos finches. When the weather changed, there was a preeminance of finches with particular beaks and size until none of the originals remained. However, when the weather reverted, the finches with the original characteristics returned. All of the information remained in the DNA, stored, to be used when the environment swung one way or the other.

The scientific evidence points to “intelligent design” of species and the universe, but science can’t say anything about that intelligent origin.

Scientists use "intelligent design" all the time, particularly archeologists, who must discern whether or not a geological formation is a product of human hands or a natural event.


Were these stones arranged by random volcanic activity or by the hands of men?

The SETI project is using "intelligent design" to filter through seemingly random space-bound radio waves for apparently intelligent communications. Intelligent design is so ingrained into us that we find it easy to recognize that when we see the sand on a beach that has deviations that spell out the words, "I LOVE YOU!", that they were probably made by human hands, not random "natural" events.

[Johannes_1965]

The SETI project is using "intelligent design" to filter through seemingly random space-bound radio waves for apparently intelligent communications. Intelligent design is so ingrained into us that we find it easy to recognize that when we see the sand on a beach that has deviations that spell out the words, "I LOVE YOU!", that they were probably made by human hands, not random "natural" events.

As for SETI, it’s going on now for about 50 years and no intelligent extraterrestrial life has been found yet. That reminds me of the missing links of evolutionism. I believe it hasn’t been found because it doesn’t exist!
In the Bible there is no other created extraterrestrial intelligent life than that of angels, demons and souls of men. The earth is the center of the universe because only our home planet is full of life, created for life and the place of the Incarnation of God himself.
It’s difficult to conceive that God also became a Navi on Pandora or a Martian .
Even scientific research shows that many conditions (about 20 factors) must come together in order that higher biological life as we know it becomes possible in the universe. There have been some books published with that argument of a very low probability for life to occur.
Even though they are building a new huge observation platform, linking a big number of radio telescopes in South Africa and New Zealand, I don’t believe that this will bring us nearer to a discovery of extraterrestrial intelligence. It will probably enlarge our knowledge about the universe.
The question intriguing me is: what will Christ do with that whole universe when he comes again in glory on this earth?
Johannes

[natman]

As for SETI, it’s going on now for about 50 years and no intelligent extraterrestrial life has been found yet. That reminds me of the missing links of evolutionism. I believe it hasn’t been found because it doesn’t exist!

I think that is part of my point. What is remarkable is that God created our little blue planet, He placed it in the optimum orbit in our solar system and our solar system in the optimum location in our universe for us to see and explore the vastness of His creation. Any closer to the center, and our sky would be awash in starlight, making it impossible to distinguish one star or galaxy from the next. Any further out and we would see nothing.

He also gave us an incredible desire to explore and to know and the wisdom and knowledge of how to gather radio wave and to distinguish intelligence from random patterns. In the end, I believe that our exploration and discovery (or lack there of) merely points to our Creator God.

In the Bible there is no other created extraterrestrial intelligent life than that of angels, demons and souls of men. The earth is the center of the universe because only our home planet is full of life, created for life and the place of the Incarnation of God himself.

Considering that God is eternal, IMHO, it is not inconceivable that there may be other planets with life similar to ours. A possible reason that they are not mentioned in Scripture is because they are irrelevant to God's purpose for us and would only be a distraction from that purpose. However, I agree that there is no evidence so far of such existence and we should not dwell on it.

[epionly]

I am amazed that in our nudist family, more of the folks believe the so called science propaganda of academia (evolution) over the Holy Spirit Breathed account of creation in the cannon of scripture - the account given to us by the very Creator of this wonderful universe. God was there NOT ACADEMIA with all their conflicting, unproven, and ever changing theories!