Do the majority of Christian's now accept evolution as how humans came to be?

Question

Do most Xians accept evolution as true? Before anyone says that evolution isn't proven, there have been many experiments and a lot of research which indicates that it does. For example Darwin found an island that contained both long necked and short necked turtles. The short necked ones died as a result of not being able to reach berrys as well as the others and died out, so therefore the long necked ones have adapted to their environment. That is only a very basic example but do most Xians accept evolution, and if not even accept it as a possibility?

I'd just like to say just because you believ in evolution doesn't mean you don't believe in God, nor the creation story, you just don't take the creation story literally.

P.s what exactly is this archealogical evidence of the bible being true?

Answer 1

They haven't yet, but they are coming around.

Answer 2

No, CHRISTIANS do not accept the theory of evolution. I do believe that adaptation (to a certain extent) is true. That is how there are so many different species that are all related I believe. But I also believed that God created the heavens and the earth. He also created the birds of the air, the land animals, and humans. He created everything with a purpose and He knew you before you were born. He has a purpose for your life, and my life, and everyone and everything He has created. I love life, and I love finding what my purpose is on this earth. I find more and more things to be thankful for everyday. You can email me if you would like, oh, and did you know that Darwin admitted that he was wrong about evolution idea when he was on his death bed? I bet you've never heard that on the media or from the evolutionists......... [e-mail]

Answer 3

I believe that since most Christians are educated in the sciences, they accept the Darwinian theory as a reasonable theory on its own, are comfortable with this concept but still remain firm in the belief of creationism.
Why does creationism win out ? Maybe because of our unexplained fastracked evolution from primates? There had to some divine intervention? Alien intervention?
If you ask me, humans as a whole would be more receptive to an alien , aka superior being mediating our development.
The mere fact that Christianity waits for the return of Jesus solidifies that argument..

Answer 4

Probably yes, in Europe, but no, in America.

A variation on this has just come up in another question, so I have a source to hand.

"Belief in creation science seems to be largely a U.S. phenomenon. A British survey of 103 Roman Catholic priests, Anglican bishops and Protestant ministers/pastors showed that:
97% do not believe the world was created in six days.
80% do not believe in the existence of Adam and Eve."

From URL below.

Answer 5

Look a little closer to Darwin's beliefs. You will find that he didn't even believe his own theory before he died. Most Christians do know that plants and animals can adapt to their environment, but if "evolution" were true in the purest sense of the word we would see evidence of that in a much broader sense today, but we don't. We do see adaptation, but that is not evolution.

Answer 6

When Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, he brought scientific credibility to the concept that man developed slowly from previous life forms. Most people don't realize that the concept of evolution did not actually originate with Darwin but predates him by thousands of years. Even the mechanisms proposed by Darwin can be attributed, in a large part, to others. What sets Darwin apart is the timing of his work. The intellectual community of Northern Europe was ripe for a naturalistic explanation of life. The distortion of Biblical Christianity was brining faith in the supernatural under increasing ridicule, and humanism (man making himself the center of all things) was rapidly replacing the Christian belief in absolute truth.

This article is one of many found within Mr. Malone's excellent book, Search for the Truth. Thus, when an alternative to creation seemed to have been found, it was rapidly accepted as fact. In actuality, Darwin proved neither where life came from nor how it developed. He merely proposed a method whereby this transformation from beast to man seemed possible. With the exception of mutations, what Darwin believed about evolution has changed little in the last 140 years. The concepts popularized by Darwin have been taught with the fervor of religion dogma ever since.

Darwin suggested several things concerning the origin of our current biological diversity. The first was that "the species are not immutable." In common language, this means that the present forms of animal and plant life have developed by changes from ancestral forms over great periods of time. Evolutionists still believe that given enough time, there is essentially no limit to biological variation. Darwin proposed that micro-evolution could be extended to account for nearly all of the diversity of life and that all life has a few original ancestors. Darwin also postulated that a force called "natural selection" (commonly known as "survival of the fittest") is responsible for guiding this upward development of all life. Can this magical force transform an ameba into a man?

Almost every biology textbook has the following example of how the following example of how natural selection works. In England, before the industrial revolution, it was common to find peppered moth in proportions of 95 percent light-colored to 5 percent dark-colored. This was primarily because the majority of the trees at that time were light-colored moths were better camouflaged. Thus fewer light-colored moths were eaten by predators. After the industrial revolution, the trees became primarily dark-colored (due to pollution) and the light-colored moths were now at a disadvantage to the predators. Thus, the peppered moth population shifted to 95 percent dark-colored peppered moths. This is a classic example of the powerful ability of natural selection to adapt an organism to its environment. But how does this explain the development of completely different types of animals? We started with light and dark moths and ended up with...light and dark moths. Nothing new developed; the population merely shifted. Furthermore, it has recently been disclose that the evidence for the shift in moth population was doctored by gluing moths to trees for illustration purposes.

There does not exist even one example of natural selection producing a new animal, a new organ, or even a major permanent change in an existing organism. This is because "natural selection" is just that-selection. It can create nothing new. It can only select the most advantageous information which is already present in the molecular blueprint of the organism. Natural selection cannot cause new information to be added to the DNA of an animal.


Note to Jay....The Pope said its true? Oh,well then , let me throw away my Bible then (rolls eyes)
The pope is only a man with another opinion. Thats ALL he is ,although many seem to think hes a step below God. He just the head of one of the biggest cults in the world.

Answer 7

wait a minute, but it's still a turtle. and it will only produce a turtle. that's micro evolution. that is true, but the evolution that isn't true is macro evolution, that we evolved from a totally differnt animal or creature, and that has never been observed. it is pure imagination. so just because it "adapted" to it's enviroment doesn't mean that it is going to evolve into a rabbit in the next millenium

Answer 8

The vast majority of Christians believe in evolution or a blurring of evolution with a spark of divinity. Few are extremist creationists (ie Earth is 6k yo).

Answer 9

NOPE.

The introduction to Genesis and to the whole Bible ascribes everything to the living God, creating, making, acting, moving, and speaking. There is no room for evolution without a flat denial of Divine revelation. One must be true the other false. All of God’s works are good, great, wondrous, and perfect.

Man starts from nothing. He begins in helplessness, ignorance, and inexperience. All his works, therefore, proceed on the principle of evolution. This principle is only seen in human affairs: from the hut to the palace; from the canoe to the ocean liner; from the spade to the plowshare to machines. But the birds build their nests today as at the beginning. There is growth and development within man, but no passing, change, or evolution out from one into another.

For this theory or fallacy of evolution to be true there would be evident stages of evolution today. You would be able to find species in many stages of evolution in nature right now. For this theory or fallacy of evolution to be true there would be no God. And that’s exactly what evolutionists believe and are trying prove. The evolutionist bases his or her conclusions on human assumptions and reasoning, instead of on the documentary evidence of the manuscripts.

<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>

Answer 10

The bulk of Christians do accept evolution as true. it is only a small and very vocal subset that deny it. They refuse to accept it because they believe the earth is 6000 to 10,000 years old, and no older. Since evolution requires millions of years, this presents a problem to them.

Even the Pope said evolution is true.

Answer 11

God Makes things he makes the different species of turtles why cant there be more than one species that was made instead of it had to evolve. cause get what it didnt evolve! It takes so much more faith to believe in evolution than it does Christianity.