Why do Christians assume evolutionists think that humans ARE monkeys? It's such a misconception.?

Question

The idea is that humanity is evolved from monkeys, as in, we are vastly more advanced than monkeys. Why do Christians make the arguement "Hey, there's grandpa! He's an ape! Oh no!" That's not how it is. No one says monkeys are human beings or vice versa. We're different species, we just have DNA similarities. Anyone who tries to make a satire saying their "species and humanities professor is an ape" is just missing the point entirely and avoiding the issue.

So... why? Why do Christians avoid the real arguement, and instead make irrelevant surrealistic commentary? And what about those Christians who do believe in evolution? After all, Evolution doesn't prove there's no god, just that the particular doctrine known as "creationism" is faulty (or at the very least inaccurate)

I don't want people answering just to agree with me, I want to know why, if Christians want a serious discussion, they miss the point. Apes are still around, but they're not human beings.

The idea is that god can exist even without evolution, as long as god created evolution as a way to reward the strong and punish the weak. A god with a sense of the artistic.

And if you're wondering, I'm not athiest: I'm agnostic. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Yes, it's possible that the world was created by god, humans were created as described in the bible, and fossils are created by the devil, or by god to confuse us to test our faith. Benefit of the doubt. What I want to know is that, if we're going to have a dialogue, shouldn't we have dialogues that recognize the actual point of the opposite side of the arguement?

And, finally, I'm not asking for arguements for or against evolution. I'm asking for why the arguement against evolution that works on "Hey, there's a gorilla in the room and it's grandpa" is used, rather than the one that one guy talking about art made. See, that's the kind of stuff that should be used. One thing doesn't have to evolve from another: that's a real arguement! Where did all of those go?

And finally, I'm not saying all christians use the arguement, I'm asking about the christians that DO use the arguement. My apologies to those who follow a course of logic: I mean no disrespect to such entities.

You know, this question is horribly worded, and very offensive. Someone report me for it; I have to admit I liked John's answer, though once again, it tried to answer the debate, rather than answer why a specific point was used in the debate.

Answer 1

In all fairness, I think that you miss-characterized the creationist position. The only people who claim that an ape was their grandpa probably says that as a joke (a little sarcasm).

Yes, I realize that there are Christians who believe in Theistic Evolution. It was none other than Charles Darwin himself who tried to discredit this hybrid that mingled his theory with Genesis. So it was Darwin himself who was one of the first people to argue that one could not be both a Christian and an Evolutionist. Don't just blame the church for this mess.

Even fundamental Christians believe that evolution might be working in present times (just not in the distant past when everything was perfect -- back in Eden).

If I may be so bold as to speak for fundamental Christians, there seems to be at least two major problems that Christians have with evolution (as far as I see it):

1) Evolution requires death in order for it to work ("Natural selection" obvious requires that some do not get to survive long enough to breed). Obviously the weaker individuals die in present times, but both Moses and the Apostle Paul said that death was originally imposed upon the world by God as a result of Adam & Eve's original sin. In short, it appears that death did not exist before Adam & Eve made a choice to disobey God. It is difficult to understand how Adam could have evolved from a lower life form into a thinking human being who was mentally capable of rational choice if natural selection was suspended due to the fact that no animal died (sin requires free will -- a frog, for example, probably has no "will" per se because it probably cannot understand the consequences of its actions). Of course, one could assume that there was death prior to Adams birth, death was somehow suspended in Eden, and then death was re-instated later, but this makes for an awkward & un-natural reading of both Moses and Paul.

For God to kill the innocent seems incompatable with the nature of God as protrayed in the Bible.


2) Evolution requires mutations to arise by random chance, not by Divine intervention. Simply mention the phrase "intelligent design" (implying that God might have a part to play in random events) anywhere on the Internet (such as here on yahoo) and watch how many PhDs pounce on you and ridicule you into submission (the secular equivalent of being dammed to hell).

Evolution suggests that "God plays dice with the universe" (Yes, I know that I'm taking Einstein out of context, because he was really talking about Quantum Mechanics, but he makes a good point about the death of the idea of causality that I'm going to steal here). Evolutionist leave no room for God, period. Evolutionists, by and large, are incredulous that anyone would even dare to believe that God had a role in forming the universe, even indirectly.

3) If you want more reasons, try reading the articles on this site since I am too lazy to write anymore, and it is getting late for me (I have to work in the morning). To be continued at some later time, perhaps.

Answer 2

While you all are arguing, are you aware that Darwin himself renounced evolution before he died?

True Christians do not believe in evolution. They cannot. It is not possible to read a Bible that says that God created Adam (in God's own image) and Eve and all the animals and believe in evolution. Christians believe that God has always existed. Therefore, he created everything. If Christians believed in evolution, they would have to only believe the part in Genesis where God created the animals.

Why do you think that saying something like "thier professor is an ape" is avoiding the issue? Its not avoiding anything.

I would like an evolutionist to please explain to me why, if we all evolved from some gas in outerspace to where we are today.. why aren't animals still evolving? Its not avoiding the issue.. you are avoiding the issue.. Please explain why monkeys aren't still turning into humans?? It can't be explained.. nor can the theory of evolution be proven.

If you would like a biblical reason for fossils.. it would be the flood. The water falling fromt the sky was so strong that it pushed every living thing into the ground.

Answer 3

I am a Christian, and I do not believe that humans are monkeys. I also do not believe that some elusive line of monkey or ape DNA somehow modified itself over thousands of years to end up as human DNA, which is what I've heard some evolutionist theories perpetuate. I also don't assume that just because I believe in God, I understand the why and the how of everything He did in creating this world. Whoever you are irritated at should have this question directed to them, instead of making a blanket statement about Christians. Your assumption that all Christians believe this is as offensive to me as the original point of your question was to you.

Answer 4

Even the Roman Catholic Church accepts evolution. I mean seriously, if there is a God, could He not have created a world capable of evolving to its present state? Why do some Christians want to put limitations on an entity that they consider to be all-powerful?

Answer 5

I have a different view. When they say Adam and Eve were the first humans I believe that because they were the first to receive the Knowledge of God. They were the first. WIthout the knowledge, people are just like animals. They eat, sleep, reproduce, get old, die. They may have looked like humans, but they behaved as animals. That's what was meant in the bible. Even today, most people are essentially animals. They do not seek.

Answer 6

Ignorance perhaps. Or the fact that their so 'brainwashed' that to denote that even a glimps of the bible is wrong is to denote it's inaccuracy and mythologic premises.

If they give that to us, then they maybe one day have to give up Noah's Ark, that the earth is only 6000 years old, Sodom and Gomora, or other fictional stories meant to teach a lesson but that the church is adamant they are historical facts.

It's faith versus science..........DING!

HEY!!! TO RCCOLA!!!!!!! Things are still evolving. This is not an argument! To be honest I really can't remember the example I know of but there is a species of chipmunk (up here in Canada in fact) that has completely changed it's mating season and how long it is pregnant for, due to the climate change of the short springs.....climate change being the number one cause for evolution.

Answer 7

:)

I dont think Christians view evolutionists as thinking that humans are literally monkeys -- just descendants of monkeys (creatures that would look very much like monkeys/ apes)...

You mention Christians who believe in evolution...

Christians who believe in Micro*Evolution are right in their belief.
Christians who believe in Atheistic Macro*Evolution are mistaken in their belief.
--
It is relevant to note that ...

There is no evidence that proves Atheistic MacroEvolution (without Intelligent Design)...

I used to believe in Evolution. However, over a period of time I have grown skeptical of the claims of Macro*Evolution... this is largely due to the weakness of the evidence for Macro*Evolution, and the fact that the evidence, rationally interpreted does not support the overarching claims made by Macro*Evolutionists...

For scientific and intellectual critiques of evolution, see http://www.godsci.org/gsi/apol/evo/00.html .

Is Evolution a FACT? See http://www.godsci.org/gsi/apol/evo/evofaq2.html for relevant discussion.

Cordially,
John

Answer 8

Real argument? .. ok...

Let's say you are given a task... to make 10 million species of animals...

How do you do it? do you make one.. and then make another totally different? or.. do you make the next one a bit similar to the first?... and then make the next one that is similar...

After all... couldn't God have made animals that were just made up of FLAME... or... just pure water?... none of this DNA stuff!

If you walk into an art museum... and you go to a gallery with just one artists paintings... you will see many differences in them... and yet many similarities...

Yet when you see God's creations... you think one had to evolve from another... why?

Answer 9

Read Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Keep up dear. This was what evolution was all about. This was to be the absolute proof of evolution over creationism. Still trying to make the point are we.

Answer 10

Not all Christics believe the same thing -- So much division in Christics is the best proof they can all agree -- How can something be real when there are &*)%$<:{}"+__":> ideas about it -- JC was God --JC is God --JC was human and God --JC was --is at the right hand -JC was born in 3 BC -- Before himself --He has always existed- JC will return with revenge -- JC will have 1000 year on earth --Or one that is a 1000-- Evolution has less proof since science usually get corrected latter in its reformation --- Christics are in a constant reformation to conform with current knowledge -- Both are the same since they answer mostly through BELIEF>>>