The combination of science and Christianity?

Question

Please Please Please, hear my question and do not jump down my throat. I do not mean this as an offense, it is a question as it is intended.

For what reason is the evolutionary theory and other scientific proposals shot down by the christian community? It is often thought that the bible speaks in metaphors, how is it then that the creation theory can not comply with the way science has proposed life began?

Perhaps the days of creation are metaphors for periods of creation? I really want to hear what you have to say. Please present evidence to your argument, this can! include text from the bible, as long as it is relevant to the question, and not preaching. Whether or not you think science and christianity can coincide does not matter, it's your opionion and I want to hear it! (non christians may answer this to, but please do not be rude to others and vica versa)

Huh than I must be surrounded by undereducated christians in my life, because the "born agains" that I know tell me evolution is a lie. Same with the catholics. All of the answers so far are very interesting and I hope to see even more.

To aarondarling and your fruit fly argument, evolution occurs when an organism is born with a mutation that makes it better able to adapt to an enviornment than say its parents. It has been observed thousands of times with bacteria, and viral infections. Thusly if such things are possible with the most basic of life forms, it is safe to conclude with the appropriate fossil evidence that humans as well as other animals could have also evolved over a large amount of time. Remmber evolution does not just occur, is is a series of genetic mutations over an extended period of time.

Answer 1

The simple answer is that evolution and science is NOT shot down by "the christian community".

The vast majority, Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox of Christians the world over have absolutely no problem what-so-ever with evolution and science. They mostly (almost universally) take the position you take in your third paragraph.

It a relatively small group of dishonest, extremist idiots who attack evolution.

There is a relatively small group of dishonest, extremist idiotic Muslims who want to go around blowing people up for beijng "infidels" and not showing adequate respect for Mohammed (TTP). But the vast majority of them are ok people who have no problem with the rest of us.

Its just like that with Christianity and science.

[Edit] If all the Christians around you are saying that evolution is a lie then you ARE surrounded by undereducated Christians. Don't take it from me, take it from Pope John Paul II

http://www.newadvent.org/library/docs_jp02tc.htm

(This guy invited Stephen Hawking to the Vatican!)

Its not a new view. St Augustine, one of the "Fathers of the Church" denied a literal reading of Genesis.

http://www.holycross.edu/departments/religiousstudies/alaffey/Augustine-Genesis.htm

Niether is it a "Catholic" view. The Archbishop of Canterbury has publicallty stated that creationism and intelligent design should NOT be taught in schools:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/21/archbishop_backs_evolution/

The "Father of Modern Genetics" was a monk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel


The head of the Human Genome project is a Christian:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/january/32.62.html

They're all Christian and all evolutionists! (And I'd guess that each of them is/were better educated than the people telling you that Christianity and evolution aren't compatible)

Answer 2

There are lots of different issues involved in this.

The bible is written in the first person and is written in a factual manner. Especially the first 5 books of the OT. If you take it as metaphor it causes tremendous problems with the law and the history and the geneologies.

At some level either you believe the bible or you dont. Pretending they meant some other nebulous thing when they write very clearly what they mean is typically the practice of someone who just doesnt believe.

Also, macro-evolution does not have empirical evidence supporting it. micro-evolution is supportable empirically but the bible and christians have no problem with micro-evolution.

The belief that one species can become another(macro-evolution) is only speculation. Its never been witnessed. Its never been proven.

Its easy to believe that you can breed specific types of dogs and come up with a dog that looks a certain way. This is micro-evolution. Whereas no matter how extremely you look for recessive or dominant genetic characteristics in dogs and then continue to breed...you never end up with a non-dog. This is easier to see in the thousands if not millions of generations of fruit flies that have been experimented on.

Fruit flies might have mutations, they might have strange growths. They might have extra wings. But, they never become a non-fruit fly. And almost all the mutations only last a generation.

That being said...there are mountains of empirical evidence that support the historicity of the bible. The story of the Hitites is a fun and easy one to bring up. For over 100 years archeologists who are skeptical of the Old Testament record ridiculed the bibles excessive record of Hitites a nation, people group, and their many cities. Then in fact....after a lot of major digs....they were found. And the bible ended up being right on about their culture, cities, placement, and time period.

Much like a study of Jericho shows that its where the bible claims. And its been destroyed multiple times.

The bible has tons of empirical proof. Macro-evolution has none.

One only needs to play games with metaphors if they start out with the assumption that Genesis cant be true. If you study all sides from an empirically scientific point of view...you at least come to the conclusion that both require a lot of faith.

Answer 3

One problem in this conflict is not Christians, but evangelical atheists like Richard Dawkins. In his The Root of All Evil? series, he will contrast the idea of Biblical creation with evolution. This of course is a false analogy, because evolution has nothing to say of origins, only how living systems gain complexity through natural selection. If one doesn't know any better, it would be easy to think evolution means God did not create the world as Dawkins illogically claims. Likewise, Darwin Fish symbols on the back of cars suggest that Darwinism in some way refutes Christianity. This too is misleading and false. It is unfortunate that more Christians are not educated about evolution (or anyone else for that matter) but it is not difficult to see why they equate evolution with atheism with folks like Dawkins and his fans pushing the same falsehood.

Answer 4

There is nothing metaphoric about the Bible outside of some parables.
Read Genesis. It would save the world a lot of grief if people would just read the Bible through once. But I will give you the bottom line.
The Bible is an owners manual for a relationship with GOD. It is not a science book.
Evolutionary theory is a science where mankind tries to logically put together findings and data to come to a logical conclusion.
Both can co exist. But the problem starts when one side starts attacking the other. Both sides are guilty of this.

Answer 5

The creation account is rooted in a historical event, wrapped in theology and artistic flavor.

I believe that God is Creator. The Bible clearly reveals God as Creator. However, did he create EXACTLY the way as decribed in Genesis 1? Well first, the 7 days of creation, the most natural and accurate reading, in English or in Hebrew is a 24 hour period. The question is not HOW was the Earth created in 7 days, but WHY is creation told in a 7 day format?

Here is the answer. Creation is told in a 7 day format because that is the way that society understood the beginning of the world. If you analyze the Mespotamian culture, you will find other "creation" stories that are 7 day events. Everyone accepted that the world had been created in 7 days. So God took that cultural undertanding and used it to teach the world about WHO he is. The Genesis creation account differs in many ways. First there is ONLY one God. Second all creation was intentional, especially the creation of mankind. Whereas, in the other ancient creaiton stories, mankind's creation was either a mistake or a seedy plot to get on the nerves of other Gods.

Also the creation account in Genesis reveals that God is King of the Universe. God created light and darkness. God created the Sea. Darkness and the Sea were ancient Mespotamian mythological creatures who represented choas. God says not only did he create them but he NAMED them. The importance of naming in the Hebrew and Ancient Mespotamian culture is that when you name something you are ruling over it. So God has choralled choas. God is RULES over CHOAS and ORDER and the Entire Universe. God is KING of the Universe.

Also God reveals himself as King, because he has a garden. The Garden of Eden. Most Ancient Kings had a garden surrounding their palace. They would place exotic plants and trees in this garden. God's garden, as King of the Universe was the Garden of Eden. In fact, the Bible describes God as walking in His garden during the cool of the day, just as Ancient Kings woudl walk in their own gardens.

Also the Serpent in the Garden represented an Ancient Mythological creature of Chaos. And GOD purposely created this creation and put this creation in the garden. The Garden was God's classroom for mankind. That they would learn that there is consequences for what they do and that they can also choral chaos and become better moral beings.

When you understand that Creation has more THEOLOGICAL signifiance then SCIENTIFIC significance. Then science has more room in your faith understanding. The Creation account is not meant to be a police report. That is to detail EXACTLY how it happened and WHEN it happened. The Creation account, like I said earlier, is a Historical event told with THEOLOGICAL signficance.

When we read History books today we do not hear about theological underpinnings of the events. The Bible is not pure unadultered history. Its history with a theological framework. And its History locked the current cultural understanding.

Sure God could have explained the Evolutionary theory or EXACTLY how he created the world. However, this would be nonsense to that cutlure. God uses culture to REVEAL WHO he is. God is culturally relevant.

How else can God reveal himself except through culture? Culture is our way of understanding and describing anything. Language and our current categories are all apart of our culture.

Answer 6

You do know that science means 'knowledge', religion means 'bind back' and bigotry is an ignorance of religion or religious views, ergo, has no relations to to science,... Don't you? You don't?! I would suggest you go to your local public library, and check out a dictionary...... It seems you may need to start with getting a card for the library so you can do that, Denny Crane...... Edit: Adding to Zebra- Odin, Oh Odin, please become Lokie of all things, and leave the ravens that are of knowledge behind! Dare not reach higher consciousness by 'I sacrifice myself unto my Self!', dare not drink from the well nearest Yggdrasil, become a Jotun! (You're going to have to understand Pagan mythology to get it.) Edit: synopsis- Denny Crane has better stats then that, yet I still get ALLOT of thumbs down!

Answer 7

HI
Some of it is compatible, for example a creative day in the bible is 7 thousand years which goes to the scientific theory of the world taking 42, 000 years to form, And Adam and Eve the scientific world has traced our origins to two specific people, so they agree that the world all came from 2 individuals through our DNA.
Lammy

Answer 8

I believe that science does conflict with christianity. The bible makes certain claims which are scientifically testable claims. And these turn out not to be true (e.g. the earth is much more than 6000 years old).

You can say that the bible is just a book of metaphors and stories, which it most likely is, but in that case it is no more of a place to draw morality from than Aesop's Fables.

Answer 9

Go to Amazon and buy "Religion and Scientific Naturalism: Overcoming the Conflicts" by David Ray Griffin.

Answer 10

Yes science and Christianity can coincide. Christianity concerns itself with WHAT God does, and science concerns itself with HOW God did it.

I am an Old-World creationist because I don't believe a day to God is the same as our 24-hour day. Why? There's scripture that supports that, and the theory of relativity shows how time can be perceived differently on two different realms. And because God wouldn't invent such an imperfect measurement. Our 24-hour-day is flawed, and that's why we need leap-year.