Christian Evolutionists: How does that work? A Q&A session

Hello,
As a christian and I quess (as labels go)a young earth believer I have trouble understanding the stance of those who believe in evolution but say they are christian. I believe the bible has many interpretations and some confusing areas. There are books in the gospel that don't coincide, but there is usually an answer for it if we look hard enough. I do think that when there are areas in the bible that say GOD said "_______" then I feel it would be arrogant or foolish for me to say I know better than those who were there. I also understand many athiests will come forward to state there opinions. That's great. I don't, however, know how I will be able to discuss the christian evolution/christian creation stance with one that doesn't believe in GOD. We can give it a try.
I understand there are many thoughts on this subject and I would like to hear some of them in a kind and thoughtful way. I don't want this to become (as I've seen in other forums) a yelling match. Instead, I would hope we will all come together with open minds and open eyes to see what we come up with. Let the fun begin.
-In Christ,
-Z

To get a blue box press edit on MY message to see how it's done: Welcome to the forum Zachariah,
If you are confused about any Gospels and would seek questions about how they coincide, please go ahead, chances are there is a good Theological explanation.I am also a christian creationist, but I don't see any problem with evolution concerning our faith. Could you maybe ask a specific question that would concern you concerning evolution and your faith?Is there a particular part of evolution that is a problem for you?

No, not really. I want to see what others have to say about their position. I feel if I can understand their stance better I will be better able to figure out how they have come to their conclusions and so on. It is my past experience that most of the people that believe in evolution and christianity or only evolution and no God, are borderline non-christian. Now I have a better understanding on christians who may believe that evolution existed post-creation. But I still think it is a rocky ship to be on. I think I'll stay on shore. -Z

Well, let's start with this - where in the Bible does it give an exact date for the creation of the Earth?

"On the first day" So, day one would be the date. -Z

Either I wasn't clear enough, or you're being deliberately obtuse. Let me rephrase:Where in the Bible do you get the exact elapsed time between the creation of the Earth and the present day?

my appologies. Well as you well know there was no time given untill he created day and night. I believe that he was doing these things all in the same time frame i.e. once he finished one thing he did the other, after day and night he made sure we all knew that sun up, sun down, sun up = one day. And since these were said to be done in seven days and he let us know exactly what made up (time wise) one day that the first day would be the same time frame as was the second, third, and so on. So day one is 24 hours like the rest. -Z

Please, please read my question again and you'll see that this doesn't even come close to addressing my question. Let me try again, for the third time - how long ago did God create the Earth, and from what part of the Bible do you get that exact figure?

As a Christian who "believes" in evolution", I suppose I fit the bill. From the evidence that is available to us its pretty clear that evolution took place and also that the Earth, the solar system and the universe are very old. So from this I have to conclude that God didn't create all the living beings on the planet exactly as they are now. The generally accepted age of the Earth from a Young Earth Creationist's point of view is about 6200 years, yet geology shows this to be incorrect. Your question seems to be "How can I reconcile this with being a Christian?"The answer is "Very easily!" To be a Christian I have to believe that Christ was God made Flesh and that He died for the sins of mankind. For example "No-one gets to the father except through me" was a saying attributed to Christ. Nowhere does it say that I have to believe in Creation, just Christ.Another point is that the Bible was written by fallible man and, as such, is fallible. There are many ways in which a story handed down by word of mouth becomes changed before someone maybe writes down a version that tries to include every version that they know of. I see Genesis as man's way of trying to answer the question we are forever asking "Where do we come from?", but doing it from a religious perspective rather than a scientific one. Remember that the Genesis Creation account wasn't written by someone who was there at the time - it was written down generations later, by Moses some think.By taking this stance I don't remove God from Creation, I just don't think it happened the way Genesis describes it. Who knows, maybe God was responsible for the Big Bang?

Zachariah,Actually, I would like your opinion on a few questions. These are not meant to insult or to belittle, I just want your honest answers as I am curious about the mindset of biblical literalists.1. If God's Word and God's Creation disagree on something, which has the highest authority? Just to rephrase, if what is written in the rocks by God conflicts with what God inspired Humans to write, which do you think is the most accurate?2. Do you think that God would require you to believe in something that was in direct contradiction to the world he created? Or, even more harshly, in order to get into heaven would God require you to believe in a lie whose only support is man's interpretation of God's inspired word?And again, I won't attack your answers, this is merely curiosity. When I was a devout christian, I had no problem with these questions. I did not judge the theologic truth of the Bible by its scientific accuracy, and feel it is an injustice to do so. My current agnosticism is a result of a lot of questions that had nothing to do with the veracity of evolution or creation.Time for a mini-rant, otherwise known as a whole lot of opinion that you don't have to take as truth. For me, it is something of a mystery that a person's faith can hang on such a minor issue as the age of the earth and the mechanisms that resulted in species diversity, including humans. The greatest lessons and promises in the Bible do not hinge on the accuracy of Genesis 1, but rather through the covenants, both new and old, and the teachings of the prophets and Jesus. David's Psalms are among the most beautiful poems of the time, Solomon's wisdom is far reaching. These are the wonderful things about the Bible, not a literal reading of Genesis and how it is reflected in nature. In fact, when looking at nature through the lenses of science and evolution, it is just as wonderous as when I was a child looking through innocent and naive eyes. The difference is that now I have an idea of how things got here which amazes me even more. Nature, IMO, is the perfect mixture of science, art, and beauty, something that no human has ever duplicated.If you want to support your views of a young, Godly created earth I will wait for you to post in other threads so don't feel intimidated.Best regards,Loudmouth[This message has been edited by Loudmouth, 04-09-2004]

For many YEC Creationists, the belief in a literally inerrant Genesis stems from Paul's connecting the sin present in everyone back to Adam and Eve's original sin in the Garden of Eden. If Genesis isn't an accurate account, then there's no original sin, and Jesus couldn't have died for our sins. It might help Creationists better understand your position if you could explain why you don't feel constrained by this.--Percy

Even the Roman Catholic Church no longer believes in the traditional idea of original sin!! You know, the idea that unbaptised babies will not enter Heaven! The whole idea of original sin was, as you said, voiced by Paul. Was he right? If it was such an important concept, why didn't Jesus make a big thing about it? Man can manage to sin wonderfully without the concept of original sin, we've got oodles of ways of doing it and we're so imaginative in inventing new ones.I interpret Paul's words to mean that man is not perfect and was born with the capacity to sin, it's all part and parcel of being human, rather than this original sin of Adam and Eve idea. I do not and cannot believe that a loving God who suffered and died for us would condemn an unbaptised newborn! Jesus said "Unless you become like children, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven" or words to that effect. How does the idea of original sin fit into that?Additionally, if original sin is the only sin that Jesus died for, how do we define theft, bearing false witness, murder, jealousy, greed and all the other things we manage on a daily basis? These are the sins I believe Jesus died for. Does this help?

Thanks for taking the time to provide an answer. You ask if it helps, but I was asking for the benefit of YECs. I think our beliefs are fairly similar (except for the part about accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior ). Hopefully there will be some YEC replies.--Percy

who has no trouble believing in either Evolution or a time frame for the Universe that is measured in billions of years, let me try to answer your question.First, I believe in evolution because the preponderance of evidence says that is how things happened. I believe in an old universe because when I look around, all of the evidence, not some or even most, but all of the evidence) says that is how it is.If your question is wether or not I see any conflict with the evidence around me and the Bible, well, my answer is no.But if there were some conflicts, would that present a problem? Again, no, not really.The Bible is a document that has been revised and rewritten by hundreds if not scores of hundreds of people over many thousands of years. If you look at it, one consistent feature is that it contains short moral plays, parables, designed to instruct an audience that was present at the time. Many even start off with some form of "Let me tell you a story". They are written in a form that could be understood by the people hearing the tale.But beyond that, Christianity is far more than the Bible. Even if every single story in the Bible was shown to be nothing more than a tale told around a campfire, or even more, if every single part of the Bible was shown to be totally false, would it have any effect on my belief system?Actually, the answer is NO!. A resounding NO!.If there is a GOD, that God is not bound by some document. The Map is not the Territory. So GOD, IMHO exists irrespective and independantly from the Bible. The question is "How good a map is the Bible?" Is it sufficient to act as a guide and reference? I believe that it is.The purpose of religion is a search into the Why of what we see around us. One the other hand, science is a search into What happened HOW something something happened. There, GOD presents us with a Universe. Either he lied to us and is playing tricks one us, or the Universe is actually built the way we see it.A good exapmle is starlight. We see stars in the night. Those stars seem to exist and we are seeing light from them. We can observe how that light is shifted, either towards the red end of the spectrum or the blue end. Based on that, we can get an idea of whether they are moving towards us or away from us. By looking at stars that are similar, we can then get some idea of how far away from us they seem to be.Now there are two possibilities. The first is that they do exist and that they really are as far from us as they appear. If that is the case, then we can get some idea of how long the light from those stars has been traveling. That gives us some minimum age for the Universe that we see.The other possibility is that the stars do not exist, that the light from those non-existent stars was created at some moment in the recent past and that each starlight incident was created in a way designed to give us erroneous information. That would imply that GOD was trying to lie to us, to trick us to satisfy some whim. For me, the later seems far more improbable than the former, and if true, would mean that we cannot accept any evidence presented including the Bible.To return to evolution, once the idea of accepting that the preponderance of evidence out there is valid, and that the Universe is old as it appears, there is ample time for evolution to work. In addition, the evidence from so many sources alll seems to have a direct correlation and to return similar answers. Evolution is the HOW. Christianity simply provides a glipse, although not a complete answer, as to the WHY.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

My "hit and run" detector just gave me a yellow warning.

---

The Laminator

​