# How can Christians "believe" in Evolution **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 10, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885 "2005-03-10T19:40:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/101 "2005-03-12T12:19:41Z")
Me: > [@](#): > > \*\*every mainstream Christian denomination out there \*\* Sample the Dog: > [@](#): > > \*\* Not so. I know many Christians, including a few clergy\*\* Two different things: I’m referring to _entire denominations_, with their systematically laid out requirements for belief. You’re referring to a few people. There’s a difference. Every mainstream Christian denomination out there requires you to believe in the basics that I’ve laid out. If you can think of one that doesn’t, I’d be interested in hearing about it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/102 "2005-03-12T17:13:25Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The Exodus (and the supposed time of Moses) is variously dated anywhere from the 15th century to the mid 13th century BCE (the Bible is contradictory on this) and the Isralites supposedly spent 400 years in Egypt before that. > > The first emergence of Hebrew as distinct language from Canaanite was c. the 11th century BCE. Before that time the language was Canaanite, not Hebrew. OK. I had the timeframe for Moses off by quite a bit, so that makes more sense. And of course we have no idea if Moses every actually existed in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Sample\_the\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8797f3/32.png) [@Sample\_the\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sample_the_Dog)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/103 "2005-03-12T17:26:10Z")
> [@Duck Duck Goose](#): > > Every mainstream Christian denomination out there requires you to believe in the \. If you can think of one that doesn’t, I’d be interested in hearing about it. Start [here](http://www.religioustolerance.org/virgin_b.htm). Your assertion that belief in the virgin birth is a requirement of all mainstream denominations is simply false. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/104 "2005-03-12T18:59:18Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > Not so. I know many Christians, including a few clergy, who reject the virgin birth, but firmly believe that Jesus was the prophecied messiah who redeemed humankind by his death and resurrection. The **only** requirement for being a Christian is to believe that Jesus was the Christ. That’s why they’re called “Christians”. You can reject the literal status of scripture and still believe that Jesus was the Christ. You can believe that stories written after Jesus’ death are not wholly accurate, and still believe that Jesus was the Christ. The doctrine of virgin birth is not a must-have. I agree. Christians believe that Jesus was something other than just another ordinary human being: that he was/is the Son of God in a unique way. I believe that God _could have_ made Mary pregnant without the help of human sperm. I also believe that God _could have_ involved human sperm in the conception of his divine Son, and that anyone who believes the latter is _not_ thereby disqualified from being considered a Christian. The Incarnation is a mystery either way. This thread has gone off on several tangents, hasn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/105 "2005-03-12T20:47:56Z")
**Denominationally, DDG** is correct. AFAIK, only the Quakers and a few other determined non-Creedalist groups do not officially subscribe to it. In point of fact, as a matter of personal doctrine and theology, I’d venture to guess that close to half of those self-identifying as Christians either do not believe in it, or hold it in a “not proven” status – something that sounds like myth but might possibly have happened, and whether or not it did makes no difference to their belief. A thread specifically on that topic might be of interest; I’d be interested in seeing **DDG** ’s contention of the necessity of it dealt with in more detail. (Plus, it’ll give those who enjoy driving through religion threads to crack jokes opportunity to do the “that’s what the H. stands for” one ;)) ---
**Author:** ![Sample\_the\_Dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8797f3/32.png) [@Sample\_the\_Dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sample_the_Dog)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/106 "2005-03-12T21:28:15Z")
I’m sorry, I just can’t buy the assertion that belief in the virgin birth is mandatory doctrine for all mainstream Christian denominations until someone shows me the money. If someone can post references to the stated platforms that indicate this doctrine is considered indispensable by the mainstream denominations, I’ll retract. But the clergy and parishoners I know who reject the virgin birth aren’t, by and large, hiding in the shadows fearing excommunication. And as just one example, so far I can’t find any reference to this belief as a fundamental tenet of the United Methodist Church. In fact, their Basic Affirmations make no mention of the virgin birth. Rather, they use language such as: “Scripture witnesses to the redeeming love of God in Jesus’ life and teachings, his atoning death, his resurrection, his sovereign presence in history, his triumph over the powers of evil and death, and his promised return.” Nothing about conception by a virgin. ---
**Author:** ![Blue\_Ruin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Blue\_Ruin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blue_Ruin)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2005, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/107 "2005-03-12T21:58:07Z")
> [@50million](#): > > So “God” sent his son (in a human form) to save us humans, whom he did not create in the first place? If he did not create us, then why is he “saving” us? This gets us back to the original spot, “Creation is the most basic premise of Christianity.” > > Please forgive me if I have misapplied who/whom. Not all Christians believe that the being responsible for creating our physical bodies is the one who is trying to save us. A common belief in early Gnostic Christianity was that the ‘ultimate’ god did not have anything to do with the material world. In the Valentinian cosmology, this god had several extensions that were of him but were not complete in and of themselves - something like angels. One of them (Sofia) became separated from the Big God, got lonely, and decided to create some company. This creation, referred to as the Demiurge, was the Old Testament God, and was lacking a soul as it was created by an imperfect being. It created the material world, humanity, and all the various lesser ‘gods’ worshipped by humans. Sofia realized her mistake and snuck into her creation’s creation as a serpent, and essentially gave the humans souls. The Demiurge then does his best to give the humans false beliefs and tries to prevent them from returning to their source by obscuring the truth. Then the brother/mate of Sofia, Jesus, shows up several thousand years later to teach humans how to leave the material world (which is fundamentally evil) and return to the ‘Real’ god. This makes a lot more sense to me than the later versions of Christianity. Ever wonder why God is such a mean jerk in the Old Testament and turns into Mr. Nice Guy in the New? Because they aren’t the same being. Wonder how Satan was able to offer Jesus dominion over the physical world when it’s supposed to belong to God? That’s because ‘Satan’ was really the Demiurge. Wonder why God didn’t want man to have knowledge of good and evil? Because the Demiurge did not want humans to have souls becaue he didn’t have one. Most Gnostic sects held that humans were spiritually superior to the creator of the world, as we have a part of God in us and he doesn’t. Jesus didn’t come to sacrifice himself, that is spin put on the story later to promote the idea that human suffering is somehow noble, when it in fact makes it harder for us to ascend spiritually. Anyway, fits in with evolution better too. The Demiurge could have used evolution to create soulless humans, and then his creator came and gave us souls. Jesus wants to save us, not becuase he created us, but because it is wrong for beings with souls to be trapped in an evil material world. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/108 "2005-03-14T13:47:48Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > The Bible tells the story of creation, as God told it to an illiterate migrant shepherd. I doubt that Moses would have gotten much from a discussion of quantum instabilities in a universe of zero volume, from which the actual phenomena of time and space were able to come into existence. Moses was adopted by the pharaoh’s daughter and raised in the royal palace. I must have missed that part of the Old Testament where Moses is descrbied as illiterate. What was the chapter and verse? ---
**Author:** ![Zabali\_Clawbane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ecd19e/32.png) [@Zabali\_Clawbane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zabali_Clawbane)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/109 "2005-03-14T14:10:46Z")
> [@50million](#): > > In numerous posts I see people who proclaim themselves “Christians” saying that they too believe Evolution to be correct. They go on to say that they see no conflict between these two beliefs. My problems is this: As I undestand it, the \*\*\*most basic \*\* \* premise of Christianity is that “God” created man. So, if God did create man, then there is no reason to believe in Evolution. And if God did not create man then there is no reason to be Christian. This seems very simple and straight forward. Am I missing something here? Thanks in advance for you replies. How can you know what processes the Powers that Be who create used? Couldn’t evolution have been one of them? If you believe in an omnipotent power, than of course they can make use of processes we can barely begin to grasp, much less veiw completely. I was raised Christian, but can no longer practice the religion because of encounters I’ve had with corrupt ministers of more than one denomination. When I was a practicing Christian, I veiwed evolution as God’s tool, which he used to shape over time. Evolution doesn’t disprove the existence of Divinity to many, it proves it. The idea behind it is, “Something had to guide those processes. There are too many fortuitous ones to be completely random.” ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/110 "2005-03-14T14:22:05Z")
> [@Zabali\_Clawbane](#): > > “Something had to guide those processes. There are too many fortuitous ones to be completely random.” After the appearance of the first self-replicating molecule the processes are not random - repeat, not random. Mutation is random but the end products of mutation are then filtered by natural selection, which is certainly not random, to get the final result. ---
**Author:** ![Zabali\_Clawbane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ecd19e/32.png) [@Zabali\_Clawbane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zabali_Clawbane)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/111 "2005-03-14T14:27:00Z")
**David Simmons** , you’re looking mirocosmically, I was speaking macrocosmically. As in, how the end of the dinosaurs came about, how the Neandeerthal line ceased. Things of that nature. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/112 "2005-03-14T14:31:56Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > I’m sorry, I just can’t buy the assertion that belief in the virgin birth is mandatory doctrine for all mainstream Christian denominations until someone shows me the money. > > If someone can post references to the stated platforms that indicate this doctrine is considered indispensable by the mainstream denominations, I’ll retract. > > But the clergy and parishoners I know who reject the virgin birth aren’t, by and large, hiding in the shadows fearing excommunication. > > And as just one example, so far I can’t find any reference to this belief as a fundamental tenet of the United Methodist Church. In fact, their Basic Affirmations make no mention of the virgin birth. Rather, they use language such as: “Scripture witnesses to the redeeming love of God in Jesus’ life and teachings, his atoning death, his resurrection, his sovereign presence in history, his triumph over the powers of evil and death, and his promised return.” > > Nothing about conception by a virgin. Most major denominations profess belief in one or both of the following: > [@](#): > > The Apostles’ Creed > > I believe in God, the Father almighty, > maker of heaven and earth; > > And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; > who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, > born of the Virgin Mary, > suffered under Pontius Pilate, > was crucified, dead, and buried. > He descended into hell. > The third day he rose again from the dead. > He ascended into heaven, > and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father almighty. > From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. > > I believe in the Holy Ghost, > the holy catholic Church, > the communion of saints, > the forgiveness of sins, > the resurrection of the body, > and the life everlasting. Amen. > > –±- > > The Nicene Creed > > We believe in one God, > the Father, the Almighty, > maker of heaven and earth, > of all that is, seen and unseen. > > We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, > the only Son of God, > eternally begotten of the Father, > God from God, Light from Light, > true God from true God, > begotten, not made, > of one Being with the Father. > Through him all things were made. > For us and for our salvation > he came down from heaven: > by the power of the Holy Spirit > he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, > and was made man. > For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; > he suffered death and was buried. > On the third day he rose again > in accordance with the Scriptures; > he ascended into heaven > and is seated at the right hand of the Father. > He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, > and his kingdom will have no end. > > We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, > who proceeds from the Father and the Son. > With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. > He has spoken through the Prophets. > We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. > We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. > We look for the resurrection of the dead, > and the life of the world to come. Amen. > > [Underscores added] With a little effort, I presume I can chase down statements either professing belief in the Virgin Birth or in the Creeds from most denominations. Note that this is not to say what individual believers belonging to those denominations may hold as the truth, simply what they have chosen to leave on the books as their official statements of belief. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/113 "2005-03-14T15:02:24Z")
> [@Blue Ruin](#): > > Not all Christians believe that the being responsible for creating our physical bodies is the one who is trying to save us. > > A common belief in early Gnostic Christianity was that the ‘ultimate’ god did not have anything to do with the material world. … > Anyway, fits in with evolution better too. The Demiurge could have used evolution to create soulless humans, and then his creator came and gave us souls. Jesus wants to save us, not becuase he created us, but because it is wrong for beings with souls to be trapped in an evil material world. And now we segue’ this thread with the “What Makes Someone A Christian” one ([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=303419&goto=newpost](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=303419&goto=newpost)) as we aren’t talking about two forms of the same religion but two different religions which use the same vocabulary but distinct definitions. (Gnostic- “God the Father”- the Original All Good Source of Pure Spirit, distinct from the OT Yahweh-Creator of Matter; Traditional- “God the Father”- the Original All Good Creator of Everything, spiritual & material, identical with the OT Yahweh.) ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/114 "2005-03-14T15:42:08Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > Start [here](http://www.religioustolerance.org/virgin_b.htm). > > Your assertion that belief in the virgin birth is a requirement of all mainstream denominations is simply false. No, your link doesn’t prove what you think it proves. All your link says is that “Most modern liberal theologians have generally rejected the virgin birth” and that X percentage of Americans either do or do not believe in it. But those are **individuals** –I’m talking about entire denominations. And indeed, your cite says: > [@](#): > > _The Anglican Communion, Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism and Roman Catholicism have taught a variety of beliefs about the Jesus’ conception. This doctrine is usually called the “virgin birth,” although the term “virgin conception” would be much more accurate. This has long been one of the church’s foundational beliefs, along with the inerrancy of the Bible; the inspiration of the Bible; the atonement, resurrection, and anticipated second coming of Jesus._ * * * > [@Polycarp](#): > > I’d be interested in seeing DDG’s contention of the necessity of it dealt with in more detail. Nahhh, it’s not worth an entire thread. One sentence will suffice: “If Jesus wasn’t the offspring of a certified gen-yoo-wine virgin, then there’s a chance that He wasn’t the offspring of God’s Holy Spirit, and if he wasn’t the offspring of God’s Holy Spirit, then He was just the offspring of Some Guy, and if He was just the offspring of Some Guy, then He wasn’t God, and I can stop capitalizing his name.” If Jesus wasn’t divine–if he was just another product of the mixing of two sets of human chromosomes, then there’s no theological point to the whole Crucifixion thing. He turns into just plain ol’ Yeshua Ben Joseph, another Nice Guy who got offed by The Powers That Be, and there was no incarnation of God, there was no “God sacrificing Himself in expiation of our sins”, no “God breaking the hold of Death on behalf of His creation”. The whole religion kinda collapses, if Mary wasn’t offishully a virgin. Turns into yet another SoCal Touchy-Feely Happy Thoughts Be-Nice-To-Everybody think tank. Ebionism. > **[What are Docetism, Apollinarianism, Ebionism, and Eutychianism? |...](http://www.gotquestions.org/Docetism-Apollinarianism-Ebionism-Eutychianism.html)** > > What are Docetism, Apollinarianism, Ebionism / Ebionite, and Eutychianism? What were some of the early beliefs about the deity and humanity of Christ? > [@](#): > > Ebionism is the view that Jesus was fully human, but not divine. Ebionites denied the deity of Christ. Ebionism viewed Jesus as a normal human being who was simply empowered by God. Ebionism is rejected by a multitude of Scriptures (John 1:1,14; 8:58; 10:30; 20:28; Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:8) ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/115 "2005-03-14T15:48:45Z")
> [@Sample\_the\_Dog](#): > > And as just one example, so far I can’t find any reference to this belief as a fundamental tenet of the United Methodist Church. In fact, their Basic Affirmations make no mention of the virgin birth. Rather, they use language such as: “Scripture witnesses to the redeeming love of God in Jesus’ life and teachings, his atoning death, his resurrection, his sovereign presence in history, his triumph over the powers of evil and death, and his promised return.” > > Nothing about conception by a virgin. Where did you look? UMC. Home \> About Our Church \> What We Believe \> Our Doctrinal Heritage \> Section 3 - Our Doctrinal Standards and General Rules \> The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church I-IV The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church I-I [http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=1817](http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=1&mid=1817) > [@](#): > > …Article II—Of the Word, or Son of God, Who Was Made Very Man > > The Son, who is the Word of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man’s nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin… ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/116 "2005-03-14T16:14:07Z")
> [@Zabali\_Clawbane](#): > > **David Simmons** , you’re looking mirocosmically, I was speaking macrocosmically. As in, how the end of the dinosaurs came about, how the Neandeerthal line ceased. Things of that nature. Do you mean to say that the extinction of the dinosaurs and the disappearance of Neanderthal were guided processes? ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/117 "2005-03-14T16:18:37Z")
Guys? The O-poster is gone. Stunned that we did not all simultaneously fall to out knees & instantly convert (it happens that way in the tracts, why not in real life?), he has wandered elsewhere. Ho-hum. 15 minutes until the next one arrives. Smoke 'em if you got 'em. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/118 "2005-03-14T17:44:02Z")
> [@David Simmons](#): > > Do you mean to say that the extinction of the dinosaurs and the disappearance of Neanderthal were guided processes? Geez, 2 full pages about whether or not the French language was born of a virgin Italian just to get back to this. At least you can’t accuse me of not reading an entire thread before posting. I’d like to re-ask the OP’s question, restated slightly: For Christians who believe that evolution was a process invented by, or begun by, or guided by God: We’re pretty sure that evolution doesn’t work “towards” a specific goal, and we know that there were plenty of false starts and dead-end paths. What’s up with that? Was He waiting specifically for humans to arrive by chance, or would any reasonably intelligent species that arrived by chance be good enough? How was He guaranteed that such a species would be an inevitable result? Did He guide evolution along, smiting various species along the way so as to achieve a more desired result? Why did He let dinosaurs reign for so long? Was he hoping that a self-reflective dinosaur would emerge, then hit the Smite button as soon as it was clear the such a critter would never come to be? I’d love to reconcile reigion with evolution, but this is my sticking point. There seems to be far too much randomness for there to be a guiding hand behind the whole thing. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/119 "2005-03-14T18:16:20Z")
> [@Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor](#): > > Guys? > > The O-poster is gone. > > Stunned that we did not all simultaneously fall to out knees & instantly convert (it happens that way in the tracts, why not in real life?), he has wandered elsewhere. > > Ho-hum. > 15 minutes until the next one arrives. > Smoke 'em if you got 'em. [Maxwell Smart} Would you believe it, the very next creationist poster is going to come equipped with five articles from peer reviewed scientific journals. Five articles! I find that very hard to believe. Uh, one refereed article and three essays? No. How about quotes pasted from two minutes of Googing? [/Maxwell Smart] ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2005, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885/120 "2005-03-14T18:54:10Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > I’d love to reconcile reigion with evolution, but this is my sticking point. There seems to be far too much randomness for there to be a guiding hand behind the whole thing. It is a bit much to believe that a Creative Guiding Hand would create a creature with a drive to survive that has to kill something to survive, like the wolf. This would mean that other creatures like caribou or rabbits had to be created for the wolf to kill. And those creatures had to be fast enough to escape killing most of the time or they wouldn’t survive to be food for the wolf. On the other hand they had to lose the race some of the time in order to keep the wolf alive. And all this in a world that was “made for mankind.” What is all this fleeing and killing, entertainment for us? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-christians-believe-in-evolution/293885.md?page=7)