How can Christians not see or at least try to see that evolution on a grand scale does not discredit God.?

Question

"Man was made in his image."
what if "..In his image" doesn't mean his face or appendages.
Even if it does nothing changes.

At one time billions of years ago the earth, planets and the sun were all part of some nebulaic cloud. Enough mass gathered in one area and gravity took over and the sun burst to life. The planets didn't have enough so they became planets not stars ( Jupiter was close) then after billions more years here we are.

You can look in different Nebulae around the galaxy and seeing the same process taking place which says creation is a thing always being created.

The fact that the bible said man was from dust or whatever material any holy book says we are from is not wrong because we did in essence come from that material.
It just took a lot longer than some would choose to think.
Evolution doesn't discredit God at all. it's merely a much more grand process than you realize.

We share the same elements as everything around us and everything out in the cosmos as well and in that way we are part of everything and everything is a part of us as well.

The fact that we grew from the earth over billions of years to develop a conscience is utterly amazing. Creation is aware of itself!

We are created in his image. as he is everything so are we.
Its only people that determined his image to human in form.
The bible said he made us in his image NOT cloned us.
look around you! Thats his image. its in everything and everywehere and yes we were made in that image.

Answer 1

Here is an interesting article regarding the view that Pope John Paul II had.

On October 23, 1996, Pope John Paul II made a formal statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that “fresh knowledge leads to recognition of the theory of evolution as more than just a hypothesis.” The Pope stated that creation and evolution can work together without any conflict, as long as it is maintained that only God can create the human soul. The news media seemed to proclaim this statement as a triumph over creationism. Many throughout the world have been asking what significance this statement has on Catholic and Protestant theology. The following are a few thoughts on this topic:

Did the Pope really say that evolution was 'more than a hypothesis'? It's probable that the secular media misinterpreted the Pope's address.

The original French address says:
“Aujourd'hui, pres d'un demisiecle apres la parution de l'encyclique, de nouvelles connaisances condesuisent a reconnaitre dans la theorie de l'evolution plus qu'*une* hypothese.”

In English:
“Today, almost half a century after the publication of the Encyclical [Humani generis, 1950], new knowledge has led to the recognition of more than *one* hypothesis in the theory of evolution.”

The trouble is, the French word “une” can mean “a” or “one.” The secular media translated it “a” hypothesis, while the official RC newspaper L'Osservatore Romano translated it as “one.”

This information comes from the Polish RC (Roman Catholic) creationist and eminent scientist Maciej Giertych, who has published over 90 scientific papers. It was published in his private publication Opoka (The Rock), December 1996, and we were told 'feel free to publish it if you find it useful'.

We thank Prof. Giertych for his analysis, demonstrating once again the distortions of the secular media. However, the Pope has long accepted the old earth theory, and most RC schools teach evolution, so it's in the Pope's over-all character to accept evolution. Especially as the RC church does not regard Scripture as its final authority.

Answer 2

EDIT***********************************************************

Check Romans 1, nature only shows God's attributes. If you want to really see God, one must look to Jesus.

Yes, we are physically made up of the same elements. The deciding factor in all of that is this: Mankind is made in the image of God. This is spiritual. Animals are just animals, no soul, no spirit. Mankind is falsely placed in the animal kingdom by a scientific community who does not see the evidence of God. Mankind is in its own kingdom, that of God's. The question is whether one wishes to be a noble subject or a peasant.

END EDIT****************************************************

If evolution is a correct grand process, then the entire Bible must be thrown out. The creation account in Genesis 1 is the first thing in the Bible: if it is incorrect what authority does the rest of the Bible have; it has none.

All of the Bible's scientific statements are or have been proven to be true even after some have tried to state the opposite.

Science has had to change more times than one can count due to new technologies and information.

The Bible in its purest form has not had to be changed one bit to agree with its self.

Beating a dead horse, Darwin finally gave up on the theory of evolution. He found it not to work.

I find that the "scientific" work on evolution is a great deal of fabrication and conjecture. I speak from knowledge and not rhetoric. It is still called theory, which is the biggest fact of its statement. Theory is unproven hypothesis. Look at some of the evidence from non-theorist promoters. It may open your eyes. Listen to some of the promoters programs on science and documentary channels. They use more belief words than a lousy preacher. Seriously consider the logic in a land animal turning into a sea animal. The numbers of permutations required in the amount of time it would require is astounding.

The facts that support faith are so clear and evident.

The facts that support disbelief are vague for a reason. And here it is:

2Th 2:10 - 12 and every type of evil to deceive those who are dying, those who refused to love the truth that would save them. For this reason, God will send them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie. Then all who have not believed the truth but have taken pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned.

Thumbs away.

Grace and peace to all.

Answer 3

Concerning the debate going on about intelligent design and evolution: is it possible that the final answer about which of these two seemingly opposite ideas is correct could simply be yes?

With one position firmly held by the believers and the other just as fearlessly defended by the non-believers, if you happen to be in a position somewhere near the middle, it does not look all that complex. From this position, you wonder why either-or has to be the answer.

If you believe that some higher being created the universe by intelligent design, what more elegant and intelligent design could there have been than a self-regulating system that continually checks its own errors and makes its own corrections in mid-stream as an integral part of the process.

This all seems quite logical to me although it probably won’t satisfy the believers because they are afraid to see any truth other than the one they have been told to believe in. Inversely it certainly won’t satisfy the non-believers because it leaves them stuck with a god that they are so obviously terrified of.

To sum up this view from the center, it might be most easily be explained by saying perhaps the designer was intelligent. Problem is, the designer was likely so intelligent that those seeking to prove that it is intelligently designed may be incapable of ever understand it well enough to see it for the elegant self regulating design that it has always been.

The nonbelievers will be similarly handicapped due to the internal terror the have about the idea that there may be a God. Neither side being able to leave their entrenched position for fear they may have to admit they were wrong. While the rest of us stand by trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. Personally I don’t think anyone is wrong, I just feel both sides are about half right.

Love and blessings
don

Answer 4

Evolution is simply a theory, and has yet to be proven. As does the Billions of years of the age of the Earth. (Not only does the Bible speak of a young Earth, science itself points to a young creation).
If there was life (and death) billions of years before Adam/Eve, then Romans 5 is wrong that "by one man death entered the world", that would tell us that death, disease, sin was not from Adam, and thus Jesus' death on the cross was for nothing. So, Evolution (and even Intelligent Design) discredits God and Christ.

Answer 5

Man was created in the image of God from the very beginning. God has a conscience and man from the very start had that conscience. Man did not develope from some lower life form.

Answer 6

some people have not have been given any concern with believing in God and additionally accepting such issues as technology, logic, rational theory and evolution. with the help of me, God could have created the enormous Bang, the evolutionary technique, existence on different planets, different dimensions, the actual regulations of the universe etc. There does not could desire to be any inherent conflict between believing in a God and having an appreciation for all of those different factors of understanding. suitable needs to you!

Answer 7

Heyaaa ,

Im christian and i totally agree , also when people take the
" how the world was made " story word by word . It just symbolizes something else because it says he created day and night first then the sun and moon , but we get day and night from the sun ? Lol . So yes i totally agree its not being rude to god .

Answer 8

I don't think it disproves God. Personally it shows me God more.

Try reading Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller.

Answer 9

Genesis gives a specific account of creation. Evolution gives a completely different account. So yes, evolution would discredit God's Word if it were true.

Fortunately nothing exists that can discredit God's Word.

Answer 10

I should delete this question every time I offer proof about Creation Theory I get my question or answers DELETED. This tells me Atheists do NOT WANT the truth.