How does evolution conflict with Christianity?

Question

I've spent years arguing that evolution is true and never stopped to think that evolution doesn't conflict with the Bible in any way. Why do Christians refuse to accept evolution, when it HAS been proven and it's quite possible that every word in the Bible is true and evolution is true.

thanks for all the detailed answers, one more note though. Is it also possible that when God made Adam and Eve they weren't as we are now and they evolved.

Also, where in the Bible does it directly or indirectly say that the world is only 6,000 years old?

Answer 1

It doesn't. Only ignorant people who don't really understand it think it does.

Answer 2

Evolution contradicts a LITERAL interpretation of every creation story I've seen from any religion or culture -- including the one in the Christian Bible. But this isn't a problem for a many of people (including many Christians), since they are able to focus on the spiritual implication of their religion. In this way there is no need to see a contradiction.

However, some people are attached to traditional views of the world that have been passed down from generation to generation -- views that often did use creation stories as a literal explanation for how things came to be. Many are not comfortable abandoning views they were taught growing up and became attached too. The reaction of some Native American to scientific evidence of how the first people came to America and what they were like is really the same reaction from a different culture.

As for the 6000 years: It's not a precise, its rounded, but people get this by adding up the ages from Biblical genealogies to figure out how long ago Adam was created. Taken literally and compared to science, history, and plain good since, this disproves a literal interpretation of the Bible.

Short answer, its a mater of interpretation, but it doesn't have to.

Answer 3

Christianity and Creationism is based on a book, while evolution is based off of data. The ones who have a literal interpretation of the Bible does not agree with evolution because it was not said in the Bible (but then again...evolution was not even thought up of until the 19th century.) That's the main reason why so many do not think it. Science and religion can never go together...it's sad when I hear Christan's try and back up their claims with science (most of the time, they fail miserably at it too) and expect people to agree just because of big, fancy words. Also, those who want to "prove" the Bible is right...I thought it said in that book of yours that with proof, God does not exist, or something to that effect....

Answer 4

There is no conflict between science (evolutionary theory or any other branch of science) and Christianity.

In this specific case, the notion that the the book of Gensis somehow has to be taken literally was condemned as early as the writings of Calvin in the 1500s. He pointed out (tu paraphrase in modern language) that the Bible is about God's relationship toman--its not a science text. And he went on to point out that stories in the Bible--which are morally and spiritually true, are also often metaphors worded so that they would be meaningful tothe people they were given to.

Religious leaders in the 1800s welcomed Darwin's work--because they understood that it revealed much of the PROCESS through which God brought life into being and to its present state of development.

Today, there are unfortunately many people, themselves sincere, who are misled by false preachers who continue to deny the truth and preach a lie that evolution is false. If you look closely at what they say, you'll quickly discover this is only a smokescreen for their manipulation of their followers for their own political and financial ends.

As I said, there are Christians who are sincere but misled. But the people who continue to preach that "evolution is false" are liars--and are not Christians.

Answer 5

The "Christians" to which you are referring are, in actuality, the ignorant PSEUDO-Christians who comprise the RRR Cult. Most of whom have not, unfortunately, figured out that a God who can create the whole universe would have had no problem adding creation of the evolutionary process to the mix. To learn more about the dichotomy between actual Christians, and the cultists of the "Religious" Radical Right, read this:

http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/10/1-cor-512-13-your-key-to-defeating.html

To "rcmtx16" -- MAYBE such tremendous compression could happen -- if the water were deep enough to reach to the MOON. Suggest you Google "metamorphic rock." Because *that's* what results when tremendous pressure is exerted on sedimentary rocks. (Water would never do it.) Back to the drawing board for you. (It's fun to watch "creationists" as they clutch at straws.) Did you make that up, or did you hear some RRR Cult leader including that in his anti-evolution disinformation?

-- "Roadrat" (geologist)

Answer 6

Micro-evolution is a scientific fact, that is how one kind of animal or plant can produce a new breed of that same animal or plant. It should be called diversification so as not to confuse it with the other evolution theories.

You will notice I used the word "kind" not species, because the Bible uses that term. Scientist are thinking of how to redue the whole system of cataloging animals and plant, because there are now so many species that are now in the wrong category.

Creation and evolution can no work together.
Evolution says that it took millions and billions of years to get to where we are.
Creation says it has taken only about 6000 years.

If you try and say that the "days" of creation are really millions of years, then consider that the Bible says that God made the plants on the 3rd day, and He made plants on the 4th day.
This would mean that the plants would have to live millions of years with out sun light!

There are other such conflicts, so only 1 can be true!

Answer 7

It may or may not, it depends on your "belief" about the creation story. The creation story does not match by any stretch of imagination, our understanding of cosmology and evolution. This does not preclude them being believed to be the same, but it does make it doubtful. Then there is the problem of original sin and blood sacrifice. Without the initial sacrifice to cloth Adam and Eve, the need for blood sacrifice is diminished to a barbarian custom.

But as in all things related to religion a little belief and these problems are worked out.

I'd rather stick with facts.

Answer 8

i think of the only component that alot of you're lacking is that God did not write The Bible, guy did. Genesis isn't a biogrpahical depiction of ways God certainly made the universe and each thing in it. From what i've got examine, maximum scholars and theologians nicely worth something will say one in all 2 issues with regard to the previous testomony; it incredibly is the two A.) guy attempting to understand and clarify issues that throughout the time of the time it grew to become into written have been unexplainable by skill of reason or logic on my own, or that B.) The previous testomony is in basic terms a instruction manual. it incredibly is a selection of persons memories, putting examples of ways one ought to steer their existence. To have faith actually what's written in the OT is honestly form of silly. as an occasion, if the full human race grew to become into born of in basic terms 2 people, the worldwide would be awash in genetically mind-blowing people using inbreeding, and the species as an entire would have died out years and years in the past, the comparable with each and every of the animals that have been supposedly on Noah's Ark. So, is it obtainable that God used evolution to spark humanity? Definately. Is it the only answer? of direction not. finally, i'd in basic terms desire to put in my very own opinion, and this is this; for all of us to argue that their very own innovations approximately God are the only solutions is in basic terms straightforward ridiculous. no possible understand with a hundred% fact what God has planned. so which you will desire to tell somebody they are incorrect for his or her ideals, or persecute them for his or her innovations, is silly and ignorant.

Answer 9

they shouldn't

science is entirely data based....religion is entirely faith based

the problem is when religion tries to explain the natural world based on faith and not science

the mechanism of evolution is natural selection, so try to refute this:

1. Many more individuals are born than can possibly survive, thus there is competition for limited resources

2. Within this vast number there is variation, and because of this variation some of these individuals will have an advantage--however slight--over others

3. The ones who have the advantages are more competitive and thus they are more likely to obtain the limited resources

4. The ones who are succeeding in securing the limited resources are more likely to reproduce and thus pass onto their offspring the more competitive traits

Darwin

Answer 10

Not even science is written in stone. One week scientists say the world is 6,000 years old, then another day it's actually 3,500. I agree that the belief of God is built entirely on faith, but the theory of the world being made by a bang is quite misleading. I would beleive that there were a big bang that was created by a higher power, being God.

Answer 11

Religion is for spiritual matters, those matters that are concerned with human welfare, regarding well-being and suffering.

It is important to separate the physical from the spiritual.

Even Jesus understood this, when he said: "That which is flesh is flesh, that which is spirit is spirit".

In ancient times, giving authority to God was important.

Whilst we live in an age of science and reason, this does not negate the spiritual truths in religion, as a trustworthy and wise guide for human behaviour that will bring happiness and well-being.