Christians who believe in evolution..?

Question

60% of Christians believe in evolution. However, this is incredibly contradictory. If God created Adam and Eve several thousand years ago, it would have been impossible for all of the different races to come about, and everyone on Earth would be an incestuous offspring of them. Several thousand years is not nearly enough time for any noticeable macroevolution to take place. If you believe in evolution, but that God zapped us here in 6 days, why would you go against the Bible when it comes to evolution, but against science when it comes to abiogenesis? Why mix science and superstition? You don't make any sense. And don't bother with the whole micro and macro evolution crap, because it's the same thing, albeit over different periods of time.

My main qualm is why Christians side with science on some subjects, but the Bible on others. This isn't limited to this one example.

If some parts of the Bible are true and some are myths, how do you distinguish? Why take some of it literally while shrugging some of it off as stories?

Answer 1

This HAS to be a drinking question.

Some Christians believe that the Bible's Genesis story is more of a metaphor rather than the literal truth

Answer 2

I'm Agnostic, so all I can tell you is science actually has as much room for error as the bible. That's to say a seemingly infinite amount of room for error.

As mankind views themselves to be the most powerful being on the planet (even if they believe in god(s)), they fail to understand that although we believe wee know everything, we still have so much we cannot explain. So, who's to say that what we think we know is correct as it stands? There is no scientific law that can be claimed is the only truth. As it turns out, there have been many laws which worked in practicality, but were deemed incorrect due to a few flaws in specific situations. Scientific law is no better than scientific theory, which is no better than the Biblical stories.

Yes, I defend yet argue both sides, for the fact that everyone could be right in part, or all be wrong in entirety. The likelihood that anyone is 100% correct is about like the hypothetical needle in the haystack, which may or may not even exist.

I must add, for Sarah, that if people stopped making deductions and questioning the way things were, life would be as bad as it was 3 thousand years ago. There would be no new invention, no innovative communications, no entertainment, no life. I don't know if you ever noticed this, but deductions are the only things that make Humans strong enough to survive.

Answer 3

there are more than one types of evolution... we have evolved in technology knowledge and other things so yes I do believe in evolution... but to tell me that I came from the same micro organism as a fish or a snake is absurd. I believe in the One true Gd who whether you believe it or not and thrive on doubt, CREATED US ALL. AMEN!

dont get me wrong science is a BEAUTIFUL THING and it shows us Christians with even more amazement and awe how God makes some things work and how feeble we are and how gracious he is. The human body is gods best science project known to man and we will go on discovering new things about the human anatomy form now until Kingdom come which shows you how greatly to be praised He is.

Answer 4

I'm an athiest and I believe in evolution.
However I also believe 92% of statistics are made up on the spot.

I asked the same question when I (was made to) go to Sunday School. The answer i was told is that not everything in the bible is litteral, alot of it is simply an "idea" -or a story with a deeper meaning.

Answer 5

I think you've misinterpreted those survey results.

The 60% of Christians who believe evolution is true are NOT the same ones who believe in Young Earth Creationism.

The ones who believe in a literal six-day creation and few-thousand-year-old planet (and a global, life-destroying flood in the middle) DO NOT believe in evolution.

There is no contradiction. They are two different groups of people.

Answer 6

Three and a half centuries ago, the Galileo incident happened. In the public, mind the Church was seen as a hidebound oppressor of intellectual freedom, while Galileo was portrayed as a martyr for the cause of science.

Following the release of the Humani Generis, many Catholics—including high-ranking churchmen—gradually got more comfortable with the idea of human evolution. This parallels the growing ease that was gained with heliocentrism following the Galileo affair.

There are certain passages of Scripture that make it sound like the earth stands still while the sun rotates about it (e.g., Josh. 10:13; Ps. 93:1; 104:5; 19, 22; Eccles. 1:5). This is understandable, since the biblical writers—like people in every land—spoke and wrote as things appeared to them, and it does appear from the earth that the earth is stationary while the sun moves.

Before the Copernican Revolution, the Church had taken these passages at face value and had not considered the literary nature of these statements—that they were written in the language of appearances (what is sometimes called phenomenological language) and did not express a God’s eye view of cosmology.

Following Copernicus and Galileo, theologians rethought these passages, saw that they could be taken in a phenomenological sense, and gradually got comfortable with the idea. The same thing happened after Humani Generis. Taken at face value, Genesis 2:7 seems to say that God created the first man directly from the dust of the ground, and that is how most folks took it. There had always been a strand in both Christian and Jewish interpretation—even before the rise of modern science—that recognized that the early chapters of Genesis contain non-literal elements, that they present the mysterious, unseen-by-human-eye work of the Creator in a stylized manner. But the majority had tended to take these passages literally.

After the discoveries of modern biology and Humani Generis, it took a while for many Catholics to get comfortable taking these passages in a less literal sense. But, just as they grew at ease taking the geocentric-sounding passages in a heliocentric manner, they also began to take passages like Genesis 2:7 in a manner compatible with human evolutionism.

Basically, a scientific claim can have one of three basic relations with the sources of faith: (1) It can be required by them, (2) It can be precluded by them, or (w) It can be free with respect to them.

A scientific claim can be required by the sources of faith because (a) it is directly taught in them or (b) it is needed to protect a truth that is taught in the deposit of faith. An example is that the world has a beginning, that it does not go back forever in time.

Similarly, a scientific claim also can be precluded by the sources of faith because (a) they directly teach it to be false or (b) its falsity must be recognized to protect something else they teach. An example would be the idea that the universe extends back infinitely in time.

Matters that do not fall into either of the above categories are free with respect to the sources of faith, and they must stand or fall on their own scientific merits. As the Pope pointed out in his address, new data accumulates with time, so such claims may seem to stand at one time, fall at another, then get up and stumble again later.

However that plays out, Catholic doctrine is unconcerned because the sources of faith neither require nor preclude them. They are apart from the faith and the Church’s ability to pronounce on them.

It is possible for it to be unclear which of the three relationships a scientific idea has, but doctrinal development can clarify this. Initially, it looked to many as if the idea of geocentrism was required by Scripture and that therefore heliocentrism was precluded. Over time, it was recognized that this was not the case. This matter is free with respect to the sources of faith.

The process of coming to that conclusion was so painful that the Church was determined not to get burned that way again, and so it is entirely natural that Church author would want to say positive sounding things about evolution, but that doesn’t make it a teaching of the faith.

Initially it looked to many like the theory of human evolution was precluded by the sources of faith. In the mid-twentieth century, Pius XII issued a tentative finding that this was not the case. In the remainder of the century, this conviction strengthened.

But nobody has gone to the extent of saying that it is required by the sources of faith. That hasn’t been remotely suggested.

Until such time as the magisterium would either reverse its twentieth-century finding that human evolution is not precluded by the deposit of faith or would make a new finding that it is required by the deposit, human evolution as a matter that is free with respect to the sources. It is a matter that must stand or fall on its own scientific merits; it is not a matter of Catholic teaching.

The sooner both sides in the evolution debate within the Catholic Church recognize this, the better for all concerned.

Answer 7

In the begining God created the heavens and the earth .Genesis 1:1

All scripture is given by the inspiration of God,and is profitable for doctrine,for reproof,for correction,for instruction in righteousness.2 Timothy 3:16

Answer 8

A lot of Christians who "believe in" evolution don't accept a literal interpretation of Genesis and the creation account.

I don't know why you're complaining that they actually accept science. Let them believe what they want on a personal level, at least they're not denying obvious scientific truths.

Answer 9

a true born again child of God does not believe in evolution and never will . meaning , a true Christian does not and will not believe in evolution . there are a lot of people who call themselves Christians that are as lost as lost can be . just because someone says they are Christian doesn't male it so . so what you say has nothing to do with christians.

Answer 10

To believe in evolution can be seperated from belief in Adam and Eve existing a few thousand years ago. They may have existed many millions of years ago. It is not neccesary to believe in the time line you gave and be a Christian.