Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

72

You certainly can, and some percentage of believers do believe in some form of (usually theistic) evolution in an effort to reconcile the findings of science with the revelation of God in his word. The essential breakdown for creation systems is (with lots of co-mingling and blurring): Naturalism: Old universe with evolution and no God at all, for which ...


36

While I have very strong beliefs on this subject, I cannot dogmatically say that if you believe evolution you cannot be truly saved. I am convinced that if you discount God's own eye-witness account of what He did during creation that you're greatly undermining your faith, but while it is an important truth to comprehend, I do not believe it is vital to ...


28

Short answer: Yes. Longer answer: A theology that requires the early chapters of Genesis to be understood as a literal and historical narrative is not compatible with evolution; however, even in ancient times the first chapters of Genesis were often understood symbolically. The 2nd century apologist Irenaeus understood the six days of Genesis as six ...


17

Answers in Genesis writes about this topic a lot. Their primary arguments are: The Genesis narrative seems to be written as a historical one, and not allegorical. Adam and Eve are treated as historical figures, having offspring, a genealogy, and death. Thus treating it otherwise would be poor hermeneutics. The Genesis account of the order of things ...


14

Quite frankly, there are several viewpoints on this. There is no one answer to your question. Some Christians see evolution as a complete non-issue (but you asked specifically about creationists, so this group is outside of the scope of our desired answer). Some hold what are sometimes called "compromise positions" by young-earth creationists, such as the ...


13

Asking this question against all of "Christianity" turns this into an overview question of a very broad scope. In order to answer such a broad question, one must paint with broad strokes. There are two basic approaches taken. Deny the validity or applicability of any scientific claims that directly conflict with the origin of man being God's direct ...


12

My view is 1) in a way, 2) no, 3) read on! Consider two snapshots in time. No humans around yet, just plants, animals and so forth. Lacking free will, they have no moral responsibility, and the concept of "sin" makes no sense. Humans exist. We have free will, moral responsibility, and conflicting tendencies: we are born to trouble (as sure as sparks fly ...


11

The most important thing to remember when Christians debate the origins of the world is that the main point of the Genesis creation account is to demonstrate that God created us, and God created the world. And as Creator, he has ultimate authority over all of creation, and over each and every one of us. Regardless of his personal view on evolution, any ...


11

Basically there are three ways that genetic diversity happens: Mutation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Mutation Sexual combination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Sex_and_recombination Gene Flow: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Gene_flow All of these processes do in fact have the potential of generating new genetic information. ...


10

There are young earth creationists and old earth creationists. Young earth creationists tend to literally translate the opening chapters of Genesis as a literal 6 day creation cycle and an earth approximately 10,000 years old. Old earth creationists will generally meld evolutionary theory with with looser interpretation of the opening chapters of Genesis. ...


9

Carbon-14 dating does give ages that are incompatible with a literal interpretation of the Bible. The question, then, is whether or not Carbon-14 is giving us valid data. There are quite a few assumptions used in Carbon-14 dating: The rate of C-14 decay (half-life) has always been the same. The C-14/C-12 ratio in the Biosphere (equilibrium) has ...


9

Catholics reconcile the two beliefs by being allowed to believe in evolution, but required to believe in the existence of Adam and Eve. Contrary to what I had originally thought, there is actually an official Catholic document which mentions evolution. The encyclical letter Humani Generis, written by Pope Pius XII in 1950, discusses (among other ...


8

I haven't yet seen someone put this issue on the table yet, so if I may: Evolution requires death to iterate through possible species. Death doesn't enter the world until after all the types of animals are established. Therefore, while I see no problem with evolution occurring today, it does conflict with Genesis. Might Genesis be a metaphor? The text ...


8

Though I'm definitely not the greatest authority on this, the Anglican Church (under whom I'm training right now) do indeed teach Evolution. There is a difference between the natural and supernatural, and though the Bible does provide all that is necessary for salvation, it does not necessarily provide all that is necessary for everything else. I would say, ...


8

Intelligent design means different things to different people. Michael Behe is a biochemist whose goal seems to be to use scientific research to uncover problems that can't be explained by science. (Or, his critics would say, can't be explained by Michael Behe.) William Dembski is a philosopher and mathematician who has argued that the complexity of the ...


8

Theistic evolution (TE) is the belief that we should look to the Bible to learn about God, and rely on scientists to inform us about science. As someone once put it, "The Bible tells us how to go to heaven; science tells us how the heavens go. Science can give us the age of rocks; the Bible can give us the Rock of Ages." This view holds that there is no ...


8

The primary argument against the day age theory is from the Hebrew Grammer. The word Yom is translated day in this passage, and in different contexts it can mean different things. In 67 verses in the Old Testament, the word Yom is translated into the English word "time." (Genesis 4:3, I Kings 11:42) Four times in the Old Testament Yom is translated ...


8

Scientifically speaking, evolution is not required for variations within a species. The only requirement is that all of the genetic information seen in the species today was present in the first generation. From then on, species experience the isolation of genes through geographic and other factors. The breeding of new species of dogs does not produce new ...


7

Micro-evolution is variation within a kind and macro-evolution is said to result from a lot of micro-evolution, but it is really a change of "kind". Variations within a kind indicate that all the genetic information is already available within the species, but through isolation of features, certain characteristics become more prominent. With the breeding ...


7

Doctrine does not make claims about the definitions that biologists (or others) use. If someone wanted to assert that the earth is billions of years old, then someone's doctrine may contradict that assertion, but it is not a doctrinal assertion to argue about what is meant by macro- or microevolution. If someone has an issue with macroevolution (e.g. ...


7

Micro and macroevolution are non-ideal terms because they indicate that the issue is the size of changes, whereas the real issue is the type of changes. Adaptation (and natural selection) are undeniable, but they consist of changes that shuffle and modify genetic information that is already in existence. By contrast 'macroevolution' involves adding new ...


6

Theistic Evolution is the belief that God created life via the evolutionary process as it is understood today by modern science. There are a few ways in which Evolution might be understood "theistically": God might have worked via guided evolution, ensuring that the appropriate mutations and/or environments arose to reach a particular end. God might have ...


6

This answer will repeat some of what is already covered in other answers for purposes of flow and completeness, and so I'll try to keep those segments brief, but I'll cover some new ground as well: God has the power to "fake" the evolution evidence if he wants to, but that would be completely outside his nature. Most Christians understand the creation ...


6

Through history, Christianity has struggled with science. Ultimately, there are only three possible solutions that we can come to in order to reconcile facts with beliefs: Re-evaluate, and attempt to change the facts (or establish new facts based on beliefs) Re-evaluate and attempt to change the belief (or establish new beliefs based on the facts) Do not ...


6

I think that "is there Biblical evidence" is a completely different question than "do old earth Christians believe". The Bible gives no mention of human ancestors, and specifically states in the Genesis account that God created Adam and Eve rather than that they evolved from a proto-human ancestor, so the answer to "Is there Biblical Evidence" is "no". To ...


6

There's going to be some confusion in any answer, because the strictness of interpretation of Genesis (especially 5) is precisely what divides a young earth creationist from an old earth creationist. By definition, the old earth creationist appeals to extra-biblical "evidence," and hence there cannot be a "biblical" old earth creationist stance. The YEC ...


6

First, a disclaimer: Theistic evolution (TE) is neither a theological system nor an alternative to mainstream evolutionary science. TE is an awkward label applied to people who accept evolutionary theory and also believe in God. Those who claim this label are not a unified group. The following is my own understanding, which is still evolving. The early ...


6

You may look into Dr. William Lane Craig, who is a preeminent Christian philosopher/apologist, especially his book On Guard covers a lot of material related to your question. You might also look into Alvin Plantinga's book, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. The answer is that you can make philosophical statements for the ...


6

Preface that this isn't a site for debating what is true, it's merely for learning what s taught/believed within Christianity. See How we are different than other sites? With that in mind, most of your question is off-topic, but I believe that the core concept from your question can be addressed if we phrase it as follows: Do any Christian groups believe ...


6

Yes, provided we are don't interpret ancestral sin as something that's physically transmitted from parent to child. Instead, it can be viewed as sin due to human nature. It is true that if we don't believe in a single historical Adam, then we have departed from the "literalist" Bible reading. This answer describes a theological viewpoint where that departure ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible