Darwin and Evolution?

Question

Why do Christians always say Evolution didn't take place because their bible says it didn't? What about the other religions in the world? What about all of the evidence for Evolution? Why do they decide to throw blind faith into a book that is supposedly the word of "God", when there is no proof that god even exists?

After reading the first few responses, I have come to realize that I was grouping all Christians in the same group. I guess because of my beliefs, I am an easy target for the fundamentalist types. I apologize.

I try to read up/learn about where they are coming from. If I am going to argue a point, I like to know what I am up against.

Answer 1

You can't include all Christians as a single group on this one. The Roman Catholic Church (accounting for more than half of Christians) supports evolution and most other Christian churches have specifically ruled against literal interpretations of the bible -- and therefore have no issues with evolution or a 14.5 billion year-old universe.

Problems with evolution is mainly an issue with US biblical literalists. Outside the US, most western nations are either heavily secular (Japan, Korea, etc.), heavily Roman Catholic (Italy, Spain, eastern Europe, South America, etc.), or religiously diverse (Canada, France, etc.). Even in the US, literalists are pretty much limited to the south-central bible belt.

There are several reasons why they may wish evolution not to be true.

First, some may legitimately feel that if people believe that they evolved from animals they will feel free to act like them. Literalists often blame everything from homosexuality, abortion, etc. on mankinds knowledge of evolution giving them permision to behave like animals. I certainly won't try to agrue the merits of this.

Second, many feel that by accepting evolution that you are denying God credit for creating mankind and/or the universe.

Third, since literalists have claimed the bible to be scientifically and historically true and have used it to make predictions like a 6,000 year-old universe, global flood, etc., they have opened their religion up to direct scientific (and often logical) disproof. Modern discoveries often end up looking like attacks directed against their religion.

Forth, it may be an attempt to shield others from such evidence that their belief system is wrong. I can't imagine there any literalist could work as a geologist, astro-physists, or biologist, etc. and still maintain their religion. Banning evolution or sewing doubt in the theory may just be ways to keep children or followers from leaving the religion.

Fifth, most literalists in the US are evangelical -- they actively try spreading their religion to non-believers. Unfortunately, in modern times most people apply modern scientific/critical thinking to pitches. Children are taught in western societies to question, demand evidence, etc. Schools, modern technology, TV, etc. have made our kids geniuses compared to those of a hundred years ago. It is a much harder sell a religious pitch which includes a 6,000 year-old universe when your audience is familiar with star formation theory.

Sixth, it took the Catholic church over two hundred years to admit that Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo were right and they were wrong. Admiting that you are wrong as a religion appears to be a somewhat difficult and time consuming thing to do.

Seventh, unlike the 1600s, literalists may not survive a general acceptance that they are wrong. Unlike the time after Galileo, folks do not need to wait several hundred years for the church to re-organize itself to handle a scientific and spritual revolution. Today, they can just join another church, become agnostic, or give up on religion. They aren't limited by the lack of options, social stigma, or religious persecutions of the 1600s.


As for other religions, only relatively small numbers of Jews are literalists. Muslims (in general) do not believe in the literal word of the bible as they believe its message was corrupted or distorted in its handing down -- with the Qur'an corrects. Different sects of Islam may or may not have literalist meanings on the bible. However, many do object to evolution in that they also belief that it leads to folks being able to justify non-moral behavior.

Answer 2

Faith. And not all Christians are fundamentalists, I am a big believer in Darwin's Theory of evolution (particularly its effect on human psychology) and I also have faith in God and the Bible as well as a respect for all world religions. Not all people in a religion have the exact same beliefs. xoxo

Answer 3

Yeah...

It seems utterly ridiculous that "organized religion" feels threatened by "Evolution..."

The evidence for it is overwhelming...natural selection, and the mixing and matching of successful survival traits that get passed on with "random" pairings of creatures like humans...

Why organized religion can't just say "God created an evolutionary process to begin the creation of life is beyond me...given the situation...maybe the 1st organic molecules DID have a little "help" in suddenly having the ability to divide and mutant slowly over eons of time...we may never know how or why cells came into being...but our "conjecture" is based on "right thinking extrapolation and logic" so...I think it all comes down to...

"Dividing" is just an inevitable trait that inorganic matter developed, and those clever little copiers have been going strong for billions of years...and life is just their inadvertant way of ensuring they keep "copying and dividing" forever...

We're all "macroscopic cows" designed through trial and error to be walking "gene carriers..." The "genes" live for millions of years...WE only live for 100 years tops...

It's just not fair that those mindless little clever copiers (genes) get to live almost forever...but (us) they're "copying strategy" only last 100 years tops...it's just not fair...

Answer 4

I'm a Christian.
I think evolution took place, and still takes place.

Answer 5

If you expect them educate themselves on evolution have you educated yourself on their beliefs? If not and your argument against creation is that a scientific theory says it isn't so, you aren't being much better than they are about the whole thing.