Can a Christian accept evolution without self-deception?

Question

I can imagine a God who works through evolution, and I don't think the past existence of dinosaurs, etc in itself poses any problem for religious belief, BUT if humanity has gradually evolved, how can ape-man of generation G be an animal, and generation
G + 1 be a human with an immortal soul? It is ridiculous to imagine a gradual development of primitive souls. This seems to be an insuperable objection to a Christian accepting evolution, and any such Christian is committing what Orwell called "doublethink" - accepting two contradictory ideas simultaneously. What do you think?

Answer 1

Makes sense to me. Most christians who believ in evolution would prob say that god kind of stepped in at some point and started the whole soul thing and that's where Adam came in, but he came from previous humanoids, not from dust.

Answer 2

Yes.

Most Christians do not believe in the literal truth of the Bible - which personally I would find difficult because it contains many internal inconsistencies - but that the Bible and Jesus' teachings more generally reveal God's truths. In this context it is quite plausible for God to work through evolution.

Your argument about the difficulty of evolving from animals without souls to humans with souls is open to many counterarguments.

Firstly, many people, including some Christians as well as people from other religions, do believe that animals (not least their pet cat or dog) have souls. The rigorous denial of souls to animals can be traced back to the mediaeval Catholic Church, for political and tactical reasons, rather than the Bible itself. Recent advances in scientific research, for instance to measure non-intrusively electical actvity in the brains of people and animals, whilst they can never be conclusive lead many scientists to beleive that higher mammals like monkeys have feelings and experiences that suggest they have minds (or souls in religious terminology).

Secondly, your claim that it is ridiculous to imagine a gradual development of primitive souls is not obvious and needs justification. It is not self-evident that souls are unitary and indivisible.

Thirdly, your argument that if an ape-person of generation G does not have a soul and there is only a minute difference between gereration G and G+1 therefore the creature of generation G+1 does not have a soul has a particular form well-known in Philosophy. it is called a Sorietes Argument. The classic form is that if a man has a million hairs he is not bald. if you pull out one hair it makes only a tiny difference, so he is still not bald. And continuing the same argument he is still not bald when he has only one hair on his head, or indeed none at all. Which is clearly false. How to address Sorietes problems is a serious logical problem, but clearly there are many situations in which such gradual change does take place.

Fourthly, in any case, why is it impossible that God should have generated a sould into a specific generation of hominoids to make them human? - Say the creature concerned was Adam.

Finally, from a historical point of view, the reconciliation of evolution, and science generally, with Christianity was a major project of Liberal Theologians in the nineteenth century. They found problems for those forms of Christianity that do NOT accept scinctific advances like evolution, such as the interpretation of geological discoveries and interpretation of the bible in the light of the discovery of addtional ancient texts, that many Christians and others find convincing. Indeed the concept of "Intelligent Design" can be seen as a means by former fundamentalists of coming to terms with such discoveries.

Answer 3

It is my opinion, that yes, you can be a Christian (theistic evolutionist) without a major conflict. from your question, It sounds like you've already accepted evolution as a valid theory and that you're trying to reconcile this with your Christian beliefs. Obviously, the bible doesn't include evolution (nor does it say that the Sun burns hydrogen either, but Christians don't have a problem with this concept), but it would seem you realize this and that your dilemma has more to do with evolution of the soul. I would think (in a Christian context) that early humans that were not fully evolved did have a soul, but were sinless, in that they did not partake of the metaphorical Apple of knowledge (like the humans in Greek mythology, before Prometheus gave them fire). In the biblical sense, it is only sin that separates humans from God, thus the need for Jesus, in Christians' view. Since animals and pre-homosapiens could be defined as sinless, or without extensive knowledge of "good and evil", I think they would be without "sin", in the Judeo-Christian context of the word ( as would animals).

Answer 4

It me seems same thinking here in Brazil. Christian community here are divided, some believe in evolution, some believe in God and some believe in both. But when you believe in God and Evolution, you are as Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and others who had progress in science. Human being is trying to discover the truth by many studies and working so hard. Unfortunately Christian men don't believe in evolution, and they are living in it. If you get out from USA and came in Brazil, you find the same doubts.

If you think ridiculous to imagine a gradual development of men, then you don't believe in evolution, because men is evoluting every single day. Could you imagine computers three centuries ago? Could you imagine internet before Middle Age? Could you imagine eletricity before Ancient Age? For me it's not ridiculous because they are facts. Men are developing every day. But they weren't from apes. In some point of evolution there would be another being between ape and man lost as dinosaurs. And this being is the point between men and apes.

Answer 5

Certainly you can believe in God and still accept scientific fact. After all, God gave you a brain, so you should use it. As for your problem, well. I'm not sure how you believe He could have accomplished it. The idea of a consciousness or a soul is very mysterious anyway, both to science and religion. Evolution doesn't explain at what point we became self-aware, or why, or how. Religion does attempt to explain that. Perhaps God simply waited for us to evolve to be intelligent enough to handle the burden of consciousness. Maybe it was His grand experiment to see what would happen when He let nature do it thing, and He liked us. Who knows? We can't fathom God's plan, and how you are comfortable explaining it to yourself is personal.

Answer 6

I believe in God and his principles but I have various issues with the accuracy of scripture: the Bible was after all written by men with their own flaws, conflicting agendas and who were writing within a very specific snip in history. This, coupled with the fact that the Bible has been translated from language to language and updated by Kings and publishers alike, leaves me wondering how anyone is able to take what is written literally.

Take the beginning: God created the world in 7 days. What, for arguments sake, is a day to God? 24 hours? That's a man made concept and an issue that the author of that scripture undoubtedly had to contend with and settle. His decision was based on the knowledge of his age and the rules that governed his society.

I'm inclined to think a 'day' to God is more like an epoch and that animals were not sprinkled on the Earth but evolved from primordial goo. And our ancestors, species 'G' if you will, evolved right alongside them.

The moment God created Man, he selected species 'G' from all other evolving species and granted it a perk, a '+1', a soul. God imbued species G with a soul thereby making species G+1. God upgraded one species to be conscious and aware of his own existence and gave that species dominion over all the others.

The issue for Christians is clearly the origin of the soul as part of the evolutionary process. I don't see the problem with divine intervention: that God gave species G a gift, an upgrade that in a moment created Man.

Answer 7

Who says that ape-man of generation G was an animal without an imortal soul? Who says that souls themselves come in varying ranges of sophistication? Your logic here attempts to infer that which we do not know.

I am a Christian and I do believe that evolution (or how we humans have attempted to explain as such) and Christianity are not mutually exclusive. What we do need to keep in mind is this: If we have all of the answers ourselves, what's the need for God? My belief is that we do not have all the answers - not even half of them. This is why our scientific theories are constantly changing.

My advice to you is this. God is infinite, omnipotent and omniscient. We are not. That's why we need Him. Keep pursuing knowledge, but focus on the spiritual.

Answer 8

Remember Orwell is not the know all of everything. A brilliant man yes but he does not have the answer to everything and neither do I or you as I can see by your question. I am a man of God but I clearly believe in the laws of physics, like you with evolution. You and I are not the only ones that believes in science and God as we are in good company. For example, Einstein, Sir Issac Newton and Steven Hawkins (who has also stated he believes in a higher power) believed in God and their science as well. Do these three great minds know something the non-believers do not? My point? I gave up trying to tie science and my belief system together and I have excepted the fact that I just do not have the answers for everything. My Faith in God is mighty strong but so is my Faith in science and no religion will tell me different.

Answer 9

Why do you think a "Christian" has to believe every word of the Old Testament, down to the creation myths? In my mind a Christian is someone who follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, which are mainly concerned with how we treat others. You can very well be both a Christian and an Evolutionary Biologist - a point I think quite a lot of Christians and Evolutionary Biologists seem to be missing these days, and I wonder why...

Answer 10

I think it is important that you remeber you don't need to read books written by people 2000 years ago, or listen to old dodgy men to interpret or take the message of Christ into your heart. You don't need to belong to a specific church even. All you need to do is live your life according to the principles of fairness and equality espoused by Jesus. Then you are a follower of the message of Christ.
For me, I believe in the teachings of Christ, ie treating others as you wish to be treated. However I don't feel the need to sit in a crumbling old building, sing boring old songs, and listen to someone else's opinions to feel in touch with god. Even though I am a follower of Christ's message, I do ot believe in his divinity - that doesn't make him any lesser or unimportant. I also don't believe in imortality of souls. That doesn't mean you are not "saved" by living according to his teachings, it just means you will have lived a better life by the time you go.
Having said that, I am an Archaeologist, and evolution is absolutely, irrevoccably, and unquestionably true. The evidence for is so strong, so provable, and so obvious, that it really is ridiculous that people still try to refute, or believe the Bible is anything other than ancient mythologies, interspered with stories of fact, but told many generations after they happened. It was written by men as a GUIDE book, not a RULE book.
I have worked with carbon dating and it is so accurate now that you just can't even try and suggest the Earth is 4000 years old without a smile on your face. Every evidence supports evolution, and NONE supports CREATIONISM.
I do believe in a greater spirituality in our universe, call it "God" if the title makes a difference. Humans did evolve over 1.5 million years, it is not even contestable. To try and understand where we came from, we eventually began inventing stories of Gods etc. These evolved themselves into ancient religions. Jesus arrived, inspired thousands, and created a strong following. Well after his death, some people decided to write down their version of his life, as so many people had differing stories. These stories became the gospels. At the council of Nicea, the ancient Romans decided this new popular religion had to be reigned in, and brought under control. So they adopted it officially. It pissed off lots of Romans, so they kept lots of the traditions, stories, teachings etc from their own religions to keep the crowds happy, mixed it with some of the gospels that they liked, and ditched others, according to which ones made Jesus look how they most wanted, and the rest is history. How can we even take the official church seriously?!?
The history of these events is well documented, and the church cannot even deny they did this. And yet people refuse to accept that the church is deceiving them....
Believe in the message of Christ, not the messengers....

BTW If you are interested in the history of this subject and the overall debate, read the following book, titled "Dark Side of God" by Douglas Lockhart.
http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Side-God-Quest-Christianity/dp/1862044589

Answer 11

The scientific and religious world are coming together. With all the new discoveries pointing to complex make up of life (DNA, string theory) many scientists are starting to accept that something so intricate could not have been random. I would accept the bible as being an "overview" of creation, remember that 7 days, in ancient hebrew did not necessarily represent days, but could mean 1000s of years.