Evoultion and creation are antithetical - discuss

[methinkshe]

It seems to me that it is impossible to believe in evolution and at the same time be a disciple of Christ - not the least because Jesus Himself referred to a literal first man and first woman. Evolution proposes an upward progression whereas creation proposes degeneration leading to death, as do all the Bible's teachings on the subject. I'm not looking to argue the science of evolution v creation so much as explore how it is possible for some who call themselves Christians to accept that evolution is compatible with knowing God and Jesus Christ. I find it puzzling..... I also personally believe that until the scourge of evolution is challenged and removed from our lexicon, we cannot, as a wider society, hope to know God. So-called theistic evolutionists must approach life from a totally different perspective than believers in Biblical creation. To put it simplistically, as the human race we are either on our way up or on our way down. We have either fallen from perfection or are progressing towards it. As far as I can tell, there is a diametric opposition between Christianity and evolution. I'd like to hear your thoughts, though, because it all helps in one's witness to those who have never heard that there is any alternative to evolutionary theory. Don't worry about the science - I'm convinced that Biblical creation offers a better scientific evaluation of available evidence than does evolutionary theory. What I'd be interested to discuss is the total opposition (light versus darkness) that seems to me inherent between Creation and Evolution which I perceive to be polar positions.

Ruth

[Old Timer]

It seems to me that it is impossible to believe in evolution and at the same time be a disciple of Christ - not the least because Jesus Himself referred to a literal first man and first woman. Evolution proposes an upward progression whereas creation proposes degeneration leading to death, as do all the Bible's teachings on the subject. I'm not looking to argue the science of evolution v creation so much as explore how it is possible for some who call themselves Christians to accept that evolution is compatible with knowing God and Jesus Christ. I find it puzzling..... I also personally believe that until the scourge of evolution is challenged and removed from our lexicon, we cannot, as a wider society, hope to know God. So-called theistic evolutionists must approach life from a totally different perspective than believers in Biblical creation. To put it simplistically, as the human race we are either on our way up or on our way down. We have either fallen from perfection or are progressing towards it. As far as I can tell, there is a diametric opposition between Christianity and evolution. I'd like to hear your thoughts, though, because it all helps in one's witness to those who have never heard that there is any alternative to evolutionary theory. Don't worry about the science - I'm convinced that Biblical creation offers a better scientific evaluation of available evidence than does evolutionary theory. What I'd be interested to discuss is the total opposition (light versus darkness) that seems to me inherent between Creation and Evolution which I perceive to be polar positions.

Ruth

Well put! Well said!

You have stated the difficulty that the Christian Evolutionist (an oxymoron) must overcome. Is the human race getting better or worse?

2Cor 3:15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts.

[Tubal-Cain]

It seems to me that it is impossible to believe in evolution and at the same time be a disciple of Christ - not the least because Jesus Himself referred to a literal first man and first woman.

The names Adam and Eve never occur in the Gospels. I recall a passage about Christ referring to marriage being a uniting of man and woman from the beginning but this is not an insurmountable obstacle for one who believes in evolution.

Evolution proposes an upward progression whereas creation proposes degeneration leading to death, as do all the Bible's teachings on the subject.

Evolution does not propose an upward or downward progression.

I'm not looking to argue the science of evolution v creation so much as explore how it is possible for some who call themselves Christians to accept that evolution is compatible with knowing God and Jesus Christ. I find it puzzling.....

It seems that your confusion results from your ignorance of evolution.

So-called theistic evolutionists must approach life from a totally different perspective than believers in Biblical creation. To put it simplistically, as the human race we are either on our way up or on our way down. We have either fallen from perfection or are progressing towards it.

Evolution makes no claim that we are progressing towards perfection or away from perfection.

What I'd be interested to discuss is the total opposition (light versus darkness) that seems to me inherent between Creation and Evolution which I perceive to be polar positions.

Considering the answers above, what polar opposites do you see?

Edited April 3, 2007 by Tubal-Cain

[Old Timer]

Tubal-cain, well let's see.

Doesn't evolution teach that once there was no life, just rocks, slime and mud?

Now there are people.

Is that a progression or not?

Evolution books propose a tree or bush of life from the bottom to the top.

Is that a progression or not?

Darwin's book had the word "Descent" in the the title.

Does that infer a progression or not?

By the way, more proof of the flood.

[Oh Hamburgers!]

By the way, more proof of the flood.

I don't mean to sidetrack this thread, so I apologize, but to me that looks more like proof of an old earth than proof of a flood. The bones were dated back to 4 million years ago.

[Tubal-Cain]

Tubal-cain, well let's see.

Doesn't evolution teach that once there was no life, just rocks, slime and mud?

Now there are people.

Is that a progression or not?

Evolution does not state that it is progress from worse to better (or vice versa). It merely says that it is change.

Evolution books propose a tree or bush of life from the bottom to the top.

Is that a progression or not?

No, the tree of life is merely a way of depicting the relationships between different species. It is like a family tree but on a much grander scale. It makes no value judgments about one branch of the tree being better or worse than another branch.

Darwin's book had the word "Descent" in the the title.

Does that infer a progression or not?

I have not read that book but I believe it was dealing with human evolution. Hence "descent" would deal with a genealogical relationship. It is no different than saying you are a descendant of your parents.

[methinkshe]

It seems to me that it is impossible to believe in evolution and at the same time be a disciple of Christ - not the least because Jesus Himself referred to a literal first man and first woman.

The names Adam and Eve never occur in the Gospels. I recall a passage about Christ referring to marriage being a uniting of man and woman from the beginning but this is not an insurmountable obstacle for one who believes in evolution.

I didn't say that the names of Adam and Eve occurred in the NT. I said that Jesus referred to a literal first man and first woman which He did in Mark 10:

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Evolution proposes an upward progression whereas creation proposes degeneration leading to death, as do all the Bible's teachings on the subject.

Evolution does not propose an upward or downward progression.

I have yet to hear an evolutionary argument for other than a general upward progress, albeit by diverse means. It is a common assumption amongst evolutionists that the general trend is upwards. Otherwise we would have apes regressing into fish and fish regressing into amoeba - give or take a few intermediary steps. As it is we have the simple prgressing towards the complex, the lesser progressing towards the greater, the minimal intellect prgrressing towards the higher intellect. That is the whole basis of evolutionary theory.

I'm not looking to argue the science of evolution v creation so much as explore how it is possible for some who call themselves Christians to accept that evolution is compatible with knowing God and Jesus Christ. I find it puzzling.....

It seems that your confusion results from your ignorance of evolution.

So-called theistic evolutionists must approach life from a totally different perspective than believers in Biblical creation. To put it simplistically, as the human race we are either on our way up or on our way down. We have either fallen from perfection or are progressing towards it.

Evolution makes no claim that we are progressing towards perfection or away from perfection.

See above. It may not state "perfection" as a goal but the end result of progress muust surely be perfection - yes/no?

What I'd be interested to discuss is the total opposition (light versus darkness) that seems to me inherent between Creation and Evolution which I perceive to be polar positions.

Considering the answers above, what polar opposites do you see?

Either a human race made in the image of God and perfect in every way, contaminated by Fall and thus entering a degenerative state - i.e. Biblical Creation + Fall, OR the evolutionary theory which begins with an amoeba or less and results in a man with god-like properties - i.e. an upward progress.

[Old Timer]

Evolution does not state that it is progress from worse to better (or vice versa). It merely says that it is change.

I ceased to be amazed at the explanations given by evolutionists. Now I learn from an authority on evolution that evolution is only

[Tubal-Cain]

I didn't say that the names of Adam and Eve occurred in the NT. I said that Jesus referred to a literal first man and first woman which He did in Mark 10:

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.

7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;

8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.

9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

Yes, this is the passage I alluded to. I don't think it causes any problems for a believer in evolution.

I have yet to hear an evolutionary argument for other than a general upward progress, albeit by diverse means. It is a common assumption amongst evolutionists that the general trend is upwards. Otherwise we would have apes regressing into fish and fish regressing into amoeba - give or take a few intermediary steps. As it is we have the simple prgressing towards the complex, the lesser progressing towards the greater, the minimal intellect prgrressing towards the higher intellect. That is the whole basis of evolutionary theory.

There is no claim in evolution that a path from amoeba to fish to apes is "upward" and that the reverse is "downward." Certain organisms are fit for their environment and other organisms are not. The fit survive and continue to evolve while the unfit go extinct.

See above. It may not state "perfection" as a goal but the end result of progress muust surely be perfection - yes/no?

Progress does not need to result in perfection. For example, consider the following mathematical equation: n/(n+1). If you increase n the equation results in a number that is ever closer to 1 but it never reaches 1 (e.g., 0/1, 1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 4/5, etc.). Of course evolution does not promote an idea of progress such as this. Survival of the fittest is the closest thing to progress you can find in evolution. It is a matter of whether the species survives or not. It is not a matter of whether a species is perfect.

Either a human race made in the image of God and perfect in every way, contaminated by Fall and thus entering a degenerative state - i.e. Biblical Creation + Fall, OR the evolutionary theory which begins with an amoeba or less and results in a man with god-like properties - i.e. an upward progress.

First, both of us, you a creationist and I an evolutionist, agree on the state of man today. We both agree on biological facts about man. We both agree that man can choose good or evil. We both know man will die. I think it is important that this agreement is highlighted because the Bible is written for us, modern man. It is not written for Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden nor is it written for one of our non-human hominid ancestors. For common day-to-day matters regarding Christianity our difference on creation/evolution is insignificant.

Second, a proponent of evolution does not think that man has god-like properties. Considering the first point and the frailties of man evident to all, I don't view man as any more god-like than you do. The main difference we have is over how man reached his present state, not what man's present state is.

Third, it is a mystery as to how man is made in the image of God since God has no physical image. However, God can make us in His image whether He created us in an instant or whether He had us evolve from previous lifeforms.

With these three points in mind here's how I would rephrase your paragraph. The choice you provide is: Through an act of special creation man was created in God's image but he sinned and is now separated from God but can be reconnected to God through Jesus Christ. The choice I provide is: Through the evolution man is in God's image and each individual man sins and is thus separated from God but can be reconnected to God through Jesus Christ. The other key difference is that you propose a literal/scientific/historical interpretation of Gen 1-11 while I propose a non-literal interpretation that reveals theological truths.

Either way I don't see a radical difference between the two ways of thinking nor do I think one in incompatible with Christianity.

Edited April 3, 2007 by Tubal-Cain

[Tubal-Cain]

I ceased to be amazed at the explanations given by evolutionists. Now I learn from an authority on evolution that evolution is only