-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Can a Christian believe in Evolution?
- Thread starter Silver
- Start date
Me Myself
Back to my username
It depends. If you believe he cannot be wrong on anything, that would be a good basis, given that evolution is in no doubt today.
About him believing the scriptures as final authority, he did defied the food prohibition laws, so no, he didn´t trust the scriptures as absolute authority.
dawny0826
Mother Heathen
Can't a Christian reconcile both?
I do. I believe that life was set into motion by a higher power and can accept the Genesis "story" as truth, but, I believe that the natural processes involved, spanning time, were evolutionary.
And I fail to see how anyone can reject that evolution occurs.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
I see no reason to make the claim that there is no basis to say that Jesus was speaking metaphorically. Such literalism 'follows the word, but misses the spirit'. People who are overly concerned with literal interpretations miss the spirituality that is prevalent in the Bible. And, as far as marital fidelity, one need not believe in a literal first man and first woman for that to be the case, ethics shows that such a thing is good. Even other religions and philosophies believe this to be true, with no need for such a story. So I find the idea that one needs to believe in a literal Adam and Eve to have a basis for marital fidelity to fall a bit short.
I don't see such rejection as repudiation of Christianity. How do we know that Jesus' death and resurrection aren't simply metaphorical? There is no indication, anywhere, to suggest that a literal understanding of the events is the only right one, or even a good one at that. I much more inclined to believe that a mystical, spiritual, and metaphorical reading are much more spiritual and holy than a literal understanding of the text. A metaphorical/spiritual/mystical understanding of this does not repudiate the Christian faith, in my mind, it upholds it more than a literal viewpoint.
Me Myself
Back to my username
Amen.
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
It's always interested me how the Bible says that in order to be 'saved', all one has to do is accept Jesus as Lord and Savior, and let that faith lead to good works, nothing more. And yet, all these churches require so much more than this, that are not really biblical, like long lists of dogmas to accept, ways and hours to pray, etc, etc, that it makes me wonder where the church stopped accepting the Bible. There's alot of good spirituality in the Bible, once one denies literalism and people's additions.
Christianity allows for whatever justification of whatever beliefs one wishes to entertain. I remember when the bible/God was used to justify why it's a sin for a white person to marry a black person. My grandparents remembered when it was used to show left handedness is "of the devil".
The bible and so ambiguous in its "meat" that, as society evolves, anything can be justified.
So yes, a Christian can believe in evolution if they want to and not change their "God" at all.
Quite convenient and sad IMO
dyanaprajna2011
Dharmapala
This reminds me of the "Christians for Cannabis" movement. I know some Christians who can justify their use of marijuana biblicaly, and even go to the extent that is was this drug that was used at the last supper, not bread and wine.
Jesus taught that God created the first man and woman. (Matthew 19:4) He also taught that because of Adam's sin, mankind needed a ransom. (Matthew 20:28)
1 Corinthians 15:45 speaks of Jesus as the "last Adam" after mentioning the first man: "It is even so written: The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit."
If man evolved, then Adam did not exist, nor does sin. Jesus did not need to provide a ransom, and is also proven a false witness, if evolution were true. If evolution were true, then Jesus lied when he said:"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)
If man evolved, then Adam did not exist, nor does sin. Jesus did not need to provide a ransom, and is also proven a false witness, if evolution were true. If evolution were true, then Jesus lied when he said:"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)
If evolution were true, there would be no resurrection. Yet, Jesus said: "Do not marvel at this, because the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out." (John 5:28,29)
These are but a few reasons of many that neither Jesus teachings, nor any of the rest of the Scriptures, can be reconciled with the ToE.
These are but a few reasons of many that neither Jesus teachings, nor any of the rest of the Scriptures, can be reconciled with the ToE.
As I see it a Christian can believe in Evolution as easily as a Christian can believe in puberty. As I see it, evolution is a process of growth and change.
Christianty, in general, does not require a person to view the story of Genesis as a literal account of the "beginning," even though there are some sects of Christianity that choose to do so.
tomspug
Absorbant
I see evolution as mostly irrelevant when it comes to faith. It doesn't interfere with any tenants of the faith (speaking from a Christian perspective). In fact, I find it mostly irrelevant to most of my life, because it is so ambiguous and so distant from anything that would have an impact on how I choose to live my life.
The only Biblical conflict that I can think of that comes into question is the first few chapters of Genesis, which is very poetic in nature to begin with. Whether or not it happened as is is equally as irrelevant to my faith as the concept of evolution.
Do I find the creation story more beautiful than evolution? Yes, and I am more inclined towards accepting things that resonate with beauty and truth (truth with regards to experience, not with regards to knowledge). I have no interest in disproving evolution, and I'll be happy to have a day in which the theory of evolution adds value to my life. But until that day, I'm not going to pay it much mind.
1robin
Christian/Baptist
Yes he can, and Genesis depending on how you interpret it does allow for evolution. There is a very respected and large Christian web site that discusses in detail how evolution and the Bible are compatable. However the Bible seems to restrict evolution to within a kind. What is a kind?. I am not sure but it is most surely sub species level. I do not believe evolution turned one kind of animal into another nor do I believe life developed by chance. I do not believe those things for scientific reasons not Biblical ones.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Why would you presume the scriptures were intended to be literal rather than allegorical? Does being a "true christian" require acceding to a literal interpretation of scripture? Don't you think it's most likely that the ancient, ignorant primitives who wrote the bible were incorrect in their limited knowledge and understanding of the world? Isn't it a little silly to assume they're infallible merely because they claimed to speak on god's behalf? Anyone can appoint themselves as a spokesperson of god, which is akin to using god as a sock puppet. You see, what you think is "god" is actually someone's sock that they're wearing on their hand. There could be a god, but he wouldn't be imprisoned within that silly tome.
What you call "that silly tome" Jesus Christ referred to as God's word of truth. (John 17:17) The Bible records the events in Genesis as true history, citing time and place for what occurred. The Bible claims to be God's word, his communication with all mankind. (2 Timothy 3:16,17) If those who wrote the Bible were "ignorant primitives" as you state, how could the Bible be such a force down to our day? So many other "sacred" texts are simply dead, with no real force in people's lives. Not so the Bible. Millions benefit from it's teachings, and live better lives as a result.
Further,I believe the Bible uniquely foretells the future with accuracy, as it also accurately records man's history back to it's beginning. The Bible is mankind's all time best seller, numbering into the billions. Not bad for what you call "that silly tome." I believe that many who belittle the Bible have never even completely read it, or have read it with a mind already closed to the truth. In fact, the Bible reveals it's ability to reveal what each of us is at heart. I believe it has the power mentioned at Hebrews 4:12: "For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints and their marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."
1robin
Christian/Baptist
No, Christianity and Biblical theology has spent thousands of years identifying which are literal and which are not. They have very effective methods of determining this.
I think it more likely that since they are accurate in every case where absolute claims can be verified by proper methods then they were given an accurate representation of what happened that could be understood by them. It is miraculously accurate in it's descriptions. For example the characteristics given to God are an exact description of what 4000 years later philosophers have determined the uncaused first cause of the universe must be like. Another is their understanding of germ theory (sanitation) and medical precepts that even thousands of years later were not being followed and thereby thousand were killed. For example bleeding of people that were sick, or not washing surgical instruments between operations. Even in the 19th century our "science" was still behind what was revealed 4000 years earlier.
That can be determined by the fact that they made no claims (beyond scribal error in later translation) that is in fact faulty. As it is what they claimed is virtually supernaturaly accurate even to the detrement of man's most leaned scholars at times. There are over 25,000 historical corroberations with the Bible and 0 false claims.
The accuracy of their claims, the demonstration of supernatural power, and the accuracy of 2,500 propphecies bears witness to the Bibles authors.
Until a sock puts together 750,000 words in the most scrutinsed and cherished book in human history even 2000 years after it was written, I do not think we are in danger of worshiping foot wear. Calling the most profound book in human history silly says more about you than it. Even your fellow critics dissagree:
"The character of Jesus has not only been the highest pattern of virtue, but the strongest incentive to its practice, and has exerted so deep an influence, that it may be truly said, that the simple record of three short years of active life has done more to regenerate and to soften mankind, than all the disquisitions of philosophers and than all the exhortations of moralists."
William Lecky One of Britains greatest secular historians.
By the way the greatest experts on evidence and testimony in human history (Simon Greenleaf and Lord Lynhurst) said the testimony contained in the gospels meets every standard of modern law and the historical method. The Bible is by far and away the most reliable text in ancient history and more reliable than many modern works.