Can anyone explain why Christians believe in plate tectonics but not evolution?

Question

((Of course, I'm speaking of only those Christians who deny evolution))

It seems clear that the Bible says God made man and God made land. Nothing about evolving species or shifting continents.

So what is the difference?

gerafalop: See the ((...)) above.

Okay, the only relationship between the two theories is that the are not mentioned in the Bible. This seems sufficient, for some, to deny one, but not the other.

Wait, do people really doubt that the continents are shifting? or am I being played?

Answer 1

There is no mention of the pyramids, either, but a valid prediction is"There will be scoffers in the last day." Welcome!

Answer 2

The plates are shifting, but not like what evolution thinks.

Evolution says that plates are forced under each other so that who continents move.

The Bible says that in creation that there was water (seas) under the land, and that at the time of the flood, the springs of the deep were opened (faults appeared and the water came up (hot water)). As the water under the ground emptied, the land settled and the faults grew to what we know today.

After several thousand years there is still a little water coming from some faults and the ground still is under stress from the settling, and so the plates still move a little.

Answer 3

Plate tectonics can be scientifically proven because of todays Technologies. But evolution has never been proved. Most everything that science has proven usually start as a theory. And as far as most Christians believe, God has told us how we came about through his bible. There is no proof the we evolved from any other creature and to assist this fact is that scientists have not found proof of what they call the missing link that would of existed between man and the ape.

Answer 4

The fact that we have plate tectonics has nothing to do with whether God created the heavens and earth. I don't quite understand your question.

A number of earthquakes are mentioned in the Scriptures: (1) At Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:18); (2) Korah and companions destroyed in fissure and sinking ground (Numbers 16:31; Ant, IV, iii, Numbers 3); (3) in the Philistine camp in the days of Saul (1 Samuel 14:15); (4) after Elijah's flight (1 Kings 19:11); (5) in the reign of Uzziah, between 790 and 740 BC (Amos 1:1); Zechariah 14:5 probably refers to the same (Ant., IX, x, 4); (6) at Christ's death (Matthew 27:51-54); (7) at Christ's resurrection (Matthew 28:2); (8) at Philippi when Paul and Silas were freed from prison (Acts 16:26). Most of these shocks seem to have been slight and caused little loss of life. Josephus mentions one in the reign of Herod, "such as had not happened at any other time, which was very destructive to men and cattle" (Ant., XV, v, 2). Professor G. A. Smith in his recent work on Jerusalem is of the opinion that earthquakes were sufficiently frequent and strong to account for the appearance and disappearance of Nehemiah's Fountain (Jerus, I, 74). The Hebrew ra`ash is commonly used to mean a great noise. Large earthquakes are sometimes accompanied by a rumbling noise, but as a rule they come silently and without warning.

In the Scriptures earthquakes are mentioned as tokens of God's power (Job 9:6) and of His presence and anger (Psalms 68:8; 18:7; Isaiah 13:13): "She shall be visited of Yahweh of hosts .... with earthquake, and great noise" (Isaiah 29:6); also as a sign of Christ's "coming, and of the end of the world" (Matthew 24:3-7). See also Revelation 11:13,19; 16:18.

Why would Christians NOT believe in plate tectonics?

Answer 5

There IS a difference, and a BIG one at that.

Shifting of continents, the study of geology, land masses, etc, demonstrate that the earth is unstable. Personally, I believe this took place at the time of the flood. Genesis says that the land was divided during the life of Peleg.

Evolution has to do with changing DNA, complex protein synthesis at the molecular level, etc.

If you base your study strictly on the Genesis account of creation in Genesis 1, as it seems you are doing, though I may be wrong, you really have to read it carefully, and you will see it speaks against evolution.

The day (Hebrew word = "yom") is used throughout scripture as a literal 24-hour cycle of dark followed by light. Nowhere is it assumed to represent an epoch or 1,000-year era.

However, in Genesis, where it describes the day ("yom") as "an evening and a morning", people tend to gloss over that and ignore what that really means.

Evolution requires - what - millenium? to occur. Let's see what happens if we treat each "yom" in genesis as - oh - say 10,000 years each.

there is a period of darkness followed by a period of light. That means on any given spot on the face of the earth, we have 5,000 years of darkness (night time starting at evening) followed by 5,000 years of sunshine (day time starting at morning).

Seriously now, DOES this support evolution? Is evolution even possible under these conditions?

Furthermore, what would that mean concerning the rate of rotation of the earth on its own axis? I'll let YOU do the math and calculate how slowly the earth would have to revolve in order to get a 10,000 year dark/light cycle.

The same so-called "scientists" who support evolution also state that the earth has slowed down since it's inception. This attempt at using Genesis to support of evolution would mean just the opposite.

Looking at the rest of Scriptures for support, we see that death is the results of sin, but evolution requires that death be an ongoing process for 1,000s of years before even the very first humanoid ever comes on the scene.

If Genesis is a parable, then so is the specific story of Adam and Eve, and so is the garden of eden, and also the forbidden fruit. There could be no temptation, no fall from grace, and therefore, no sin. This makes a complete mockery of ALL the Scriptures, from Abraham being asked to offer up his son Isaac as a living picture of what God would one day do, through the law of Moses requiring an animal sacrifice for sin as a foreshadowing of the future coming of the "Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world", the prophets who foretold the coming of the Redeemer, and finally and ultimately, it would make a mockery of the life (but especially) and death of Jesus Christ who died for sins that don't exist!

Genesis does NOT support evolution by even the most extreme stretch of the imagination.

I trust that this long, drawn out answer sufficiently satisfies your question.

Answer 6

Take a basic geology class and educate yourself. PS - I don't know where you are getting your information from but plate tectonics have nothing to do with frozen mammoths. They do however play a key role in forming mountain chains.

Answer 7

Are you kidding me. They are not even in the same hemisphere scientifically. Evolution has never, I repeat, never been proven. It was, is and always will be a hypothesis. The few species that have "adapted" to their environments, have done so due to God's design and they adapt, they do not evolve. They do not become a whole new species. Plate tectonics is a natural way that the earth is designed. It is constantly regenerating new crust through volcanic activity to replace the old crust. As a more practical example, do you think the skin on your hand is the same skin from the day you were born. NO, it is replaced by new skin periodically when the old skin gets worn, dirty, or damaged. The same with the earths crust.

Answer 8

This is a new one. Here's my take, on the spur of the moment, without too much thought:

I'm a Christian, and I believe in creation, but that does not preclude evolution in its entirety. I believe God made things changeable and adaptable, it's part of the miracle of life. I believe our thumbs are getting bigger. The same thing applies to the land. God made the land, but it's changeable and adaptable. The flow of water, weather, etc. all effects the earth. He didn't make it one day and make it unchangeable. God made the heavens, and earth with all it's imperfections. After all, people aren't perfect, either, but that makes us more interesting. He gave us free will, and in that vien, also gave the earth the ability to change.

Have I made sense?

Answer 9

The shifting plates is something that is not in doubt.
The only reference to this is in Genesis 10:25, where it names a man, Peleg, "...for in his days was the earth divided."
His name means earthquake. Apparently, this could very well be what began the shifting. If the Bible is to be believed, it was enough to "divide" the earth. It must've been a long, huge quake.

Answer 10

you can believe in plate tectonics and not evolution. Plate tectonics does not prove evolution. It is supported by most christians i know since it was something that happened during the flood, thus helping to create that horrible 40 days that wiped out everyone but noah and his crew. (damn i wish he could have saved the unicorn) It is also believed that during the flood is when the earth shifted its axis by some christians

Answer 11

The plates has always been shifting, This was even evident in Jesus day when a great earthquake happened at his murder. the difference is just a play on words or people assume.