Yes, there could be Christianity without creation. Whether or not God created the universe, it serves His purpose all the same.
And incidentally, if you disregard Tris’s contributions — ever — you are depriving yourself of enormous edification. He has never posted a random divergence.
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t the most basic premise of any belief in a supreme being suggest that that “Creator” or “God” initiated everything that exists, not just man?
If that is so, than Christianity and Evolution are not mutually exclusive, because the Christian God was responsible for the “existence” of the Evolution Theory in the first place.
Again you demonstrate a lack of understanding of the punctuation, even as you choose to change it.
Lots of people say, “I am a Christian.”
No one ever says,
Until you understand that difference, and acknowlege the implication inherent in your use of it in the OP, I will have to consider your dialog here to be dishonest, and probably not worth responding to.
Sorry, but others have spoken here before you, and the well has been poisoned.
Tris
Evolution is a process. I believe the Almighty can use any process he desires to.
Not saying he did; I really don’t much concern myself about it either way. Notwithstanding that, I call myself a Christian.
How do you get that from Christ’s teachings, though?
Didn’t Christ say the most basic commandment was to love God and the second most basic commandment was to love one another (as we love ourselves).
I realize that commandment is not the same as premise, but it’s unclear to me what “premise” means in terms of a religion. “Premise” is a term used in logic, and logic isn’t something that is useful in understanding the fundamentals of religion.
Just playing devil’s advocate here, several posters have said that the Bible is not literally true. If that’s the case, how does one determine which parts to believe and which parts not to? IOW, how does one determine that “Christ died on the corss to atone for mankind’s sins”? What informs us of the truth of that doctrine? Are we to believe that the NT is literally true, but not the OT?
I again highly recommend Kenneth Miller’s “Finding Darwin’s God” In addition to being one of the best layman’s defenses of evolution against creationists, it actually has a completely different purpose: to castigate some prominent atheist scientists (Wilson, Dawkins, Gould) for making unwarranted declarations about how evolution undermines all possible theology, and Christians for believing it. Miller outlines pretty convincingly the case (familiar to many theologians but usually not to the layman) that a universe undetermined by the direct will or planning of God is actually superior in some ways to Christian theology because it allows genuinely indepedant-from-God choices in a way that no more obsessively designed or “over-tinkered” universe can.
It depends on what you mean by “Creation”. If you mean God’s Creation of the universe, then of course there can be no Christianity without Creation because there can be nothing without Creation. I firmly believe God created the universe.
If by “Creation” you mean something along the lines of Young Earth Creationism or the belief that the earth is only 6 million years old, then there most certainly can be Christianity without Creation; indeed, since Young Earth Creationism in its current form is a fairly recent development and is not adhered to by many people of denominations, including Cathlics, Anglicans, Presbyterians, and most of the various Orthodox faiths, not to mention Armenian Christians, I’d say Young Earth Creationists are probably in the minority, although that may vary by region.
I believe that God used the mechanism of evolution to create mankind in our current form. At some point in the evolutionary process, God gave mankind the gift of souls which entails wisdom, discernment, and the ability to act out of free will rather than blind instinct. To me, the story of Adam and Eve is an allegorical description of that moment in prehistory. I do not believe the entire Bible is allegory; specifically, I believe the events depicted in the Gospels and the various Epistles are not allegorical. I don’t know enough about the Old Testament to safely make divisions, although I’m willing to bet on large portions of the Book of Psalms and the Song of Solomon being allegorical.
Christ commanded us to love God with all our hearts, with all our souls, and with all our minds. To me, that means using the mind God gave me to look at the evidence available, evidence I believe God made available to us and come to the conclusion that the creation of mankind was far more marvelous and wondrous than what amounts to God basically waving a magic wand. One of my hobbies is knitting. I take great pleasure in seeing a sweater start to take shape under my knitting needles as it reaches its final form and the friends I’ve given hand knit items to value them far more greatly than something store-bought and pre-made. That’s the way my attitude towards evolution is. The idea that God set in motion an intricate process and, I assume, took pleasure in seeing that process work is far more satisfying to my mind and soul than Creation is.
The evidence for evolution is real and does exist. If it didn’t, evolution wouldn’t be the current theory. I assure you, evolution was not made up to mock God and Charles Darwin was a devout Christian who could not ignore the evidence of his senses. If you assume the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing Deity, then the only conclusion I can reach is that that Deity intended for us to discover the evidence of evolution at an appropriate time. If that’s the case, then I’m faced with two choices.
[ul][li]One: God planted that evidence so we could see how marvelous, intricate, and magnificent the process that created the world is. This is what I believe and it has enhanced my awe and wonder at the glory of God.[/li][li]Two: God planted that evidence to trick us into believing lies and falsehood and to lead us into temptation. This reduces God to the level of trickster Gods such as Loki or Coyote, lying in wait for us humans to foul up so he can demonstrate his compassion and kindness by forgiving us. To me, it’s akin to the person who trips you so he can show how nice he is by helping you up. Needless to say, this is not what I believe.[/ul][/li]
I’m a programmer and the daughter and sister of engineers. I was raised on reason, logic, and was taught to use my mind to sort things out. If someone tells me something which contradicts something I assume to be true, I look into it further and draw my own conclusions. I’ve seen quite a few things which should work in theory, but don’t in practice, or at least don’t work the way they’re supposed to. Accepting Young Earth Creationism on blind faith, especially when I know the Bible contradicts itself because I’ve read the contradicitions myself, goes against my training, my upbringing, and my own questioning, somewhat contrary soul. Evolution, on the other hand, has a certain appeal as the most likely explanation, especially since I know the theory itself has changed over time as evidence has become available.
I’m also a poet and musician. I love beauty, mystery, and wonder. To me, those qualities are far more evident in the idea of molecules coming together to form earth and life changing from simple one-celled animals to creatures as complex as humans, dolphins, butterflies, mushrooms, fruit flies, or slugs. I lived in Hawaii for several years, and I’ve seen nene geese, flightless geese nicely adapted to Hawaii, or they were until men introduced rats and mongooses. Young Earth Creationism is far less satisfying.
Finally, I’m an oddball. I know that most people don’t habitually question assumptions or authority, and I’ll even grant that it’s an easier and more comfortable way to live, at least for them. Unfortunately, when I’ve tried it, it’s blown up in my face! :eek: I actually don’t have a problem when people choose to believe in a more simplistic idea of how God created man. All I ask is that you don’t tell me what my niece and nephew can’t be taught in science classes (they’re also an engineer’s kids and just as prone to questioning) and that you not tell me I can’t be a Christian or I’m less of a Christian because I disagree with you. Trust me, I most certainly do have a personal relationship with Jesus; the Man’s been known to interfere in my love life, for crying out loud! 
He knows my faith and my mind. My trust in Him is absolute. If I’m wrong about evolution, I have no doubt I’ll find out, if only at the end of my life. Meanwhile, I’ll continue to believe what I believe He has led me to believe.
Respectfully,
CJ
Firstly, I’m a Roman Catholic and I believe in evolution (obviously there is scientific debate of specific parts of the evolution theory, but basically I believe evolution on the elementary level that is taught in high school.) I went to a Catholic High School where in my 10th grade biology class we learned the basics behind evolution, natural seleciton, a little history about Darwin etc.
Evolution is a process. Nuclear fission is a process. The earth’s rotation is a process. Just because we view a process, doesn’t mean it says anything about religion. Galileo thought the earth revolved around the Sun. That doesn’t prove or disprove anything having to do with God. We can show using physics why the earth revolves around the sun, that again has nothing to do with god. The very properties and physics processes we view and understand could be direct actions of God, God could be steering it all, and our rudimentary science knowledge is just how we “see” his actions. Or, God could have created existence in a sort of “terrarium” manner, where he creates certain basic building blocks, then leaves natural processes to themselves. We don’t know, the Bible does not go in depth enough for us to say anything contradicts or supports the exact processes of creation or any other scientific reality.
Evolution does not disprove Genesis.
Firstly, many of the exact phrasings in Genesis are distortions. Believe it or not, under the original Genesis it really didn’t read that God created the earth and all existence within a week’s time. The creation myth has been changed substantially by the Catholic Church (they felt it was in their interests to “fiddle” a bit with the translations from older texts.)
It’s very possible with analysis of certain texts to read creation like this:
“In several stages God created all of existence, the earth, plants, water, animals, et al. For a time there were creatures on the earth, and eventually God decided to take his hand and modify things somewhat. So he created man (scientifically we could say God started the specific process to evolve a human creature on earth) and from man, he chose a single man (Adam) to be the founder of his “sacred tribe.” From there we go through the old testament, a tale of how God’s chosen people struggled with various problems. It was always taught that God’s way was absolute, and God then gave his chosen people a messiah, this messiah in one fell swoop opened up many possibilities to all of mankind (this is of course where Judaism and Christianity split.)”
FWIW, I think evolution is possible, but I don’t believe that that’s the way this world came about. I believe that God created the world.
Define what you mean by “Creation.” The word gets used in different ways. If, by “God created the world” or “God created human beings” you mean that God caused them to exist, you’re saying something that just about all Christians (and Jews* and Moslems and other believers in a Creator God) would agree with. And those who believe in the/a theory of evolution would say that it explains how God brought human beings into existence.
*(“Jews” in the religious sense, not necessarily the ethnic or cultural)
Evolutionary theory has nothing to do with “how the world came about.” The ToE does not deal with the origin of the universe or of the origin of the earth or even of the origin of life. Evolutionary theory only addresses what happened after life began on earth.
There is no binary choice between God creating the universe and evolutionary theory being accurate. Evolution has nothing to do with the existence of God.
This is something that is widely misunderstood and it’s why something that should not even be debatable has become so intractable as an issue to some.
It’s a proven factm by the way. It’s not a question of “possibility.” We know for a fact that it’s true. Just FYI.
Tris,
Please forgive any percieved intentional “word games” in my first response to your post and my misapplication of quotation marks. I certainly acknowledge the difference between, “I am a Christian” and I am a “Christian”.
Please allow me to better state my problem with your original post; The OP, while obviously not worded perfectly, was fairly straght forward. How do Christians reconcile the differences between the Bible and current Evolutionary theory.
This question has been answered quite well by many posters. Your first post questioned grammar usage (which I admit was faulty), which I found disinginuous at the time. I will modify my perception of that orginal post based on your statement, “Sorry, but others have spoken here before you, and the well has been poisoned.”
I hope I have rectified any percieved dishonesty or slight to you.
At the same time I purposely worded the post trying to sound neutral on the subject so as to enjoy a better quality of response. The misapplication of quotation marks was truly an honest oversight.
I am a Christian and I emphatically do not “believe” in evolution. On the other hand I certainly do accept the scientific evidence that Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection (refined by Dobzhansky’s work with Mendelian genetics in neo-Darwinism) is currently the best explanation for the recorded evidence displaying the fact of evolution. I also recognize that the mythology employed by the authors in the opening chapters of the book of Genesis conveys the truth that the world (or cosmos) is an ordered place established by God and that that creative act has permitted the development of the human species.
Augustine of Hippo de Genesis 19:39
CJ,
Thank you for the excellent reply.
I obviously need to do a better job in wording my questions. What I meant was, “Can we have Christianity with God having ANY hand in the existance of man, or this entire universe?” Let us assume that the universe came to exist somehow without Gods involvement. God and the universe just happen to coexist, without any involvment. Is Christianity as we know it possible under this scenario?
Tom,
I Love the Augustine quote. It’s amazingly applicable to a discussion he could have never seen coming. Thanks.
Do you mean it’s been proven that evolution is how we came to be where we are today? Or that it’s possible and it can happen?
I frequently read these discussions, but never respond in them. There are dozens of people who can articulate my opinions better than I ever could. I just wanted to mention that I am impressed with the efforts made by 50million (and the respondents) to come across as civil and willing to engage in a serious discussion with people who may disagree with him. This may be the longest I have ever seen an evolution thread remain civil.
It’s been proven that all living species, including humans, are evolved from a single common ancestor. The evidence for this is so undeniable that many Christian denominations and individual Christians have found ways to incoporate it into their faith. The RCC , for example. officially holds the position that evolution is not incompatible with Catholic doctrine as long as it is understood that God is behind everything and that the human soul is divinely created and unevolved.
I remember the thread with Roger Thornhill nee Bodswood going pretty well too. RT hung in there a long time and listened to answers and asked good questions without blowing up. It was actually an enjoyable discussion and I’ve since come to appreciate RT’s wit on the board.
One of the things brought up in this debate that generally annoys the shit out of me. (to put it bluntly) is the idea that faith isn’t logical.
It is not faith or religion that are illogical, it is the human being trying to reconcile them. Faith is the trust that one’s intuitive knowledge has some basis in reality, at least enough as to examine how it feels, whether or not it is true. Logic is a set of rules that allows us to deduce whether or not something is true, and if it is, how it is true.
So we discover the universe with our intuition. Intuition is like radar, taking in a wide expanse. Logic is like a laser, cutting the whole into smaller more manageable parts, and looking at them individually in order to build a comprehensive whole so that we may then understand what we know.
There is really no difference between “Let there be Light” and “The Big Bang”, they are both metaphors for that initial instant of light out of darkness. One of the major misunderstandings brought about is the idea that the big bang happened sometime in the past. The big bang is the point of conception, and is constantly occuring in an infinite, eternal and static universe where all possibilities are available, or if not all possibilities, at the very least, this one. The fact that this universe was ‘created’ is immutable. It is an objective fact. Now we can quibble over the definition of created, immutable, objective and fact, but the universe exists.
Time is ‘measured’ now those measurements are based upon smaller units that we can use to identify specific allotments of it. One of the most basic is a ‘day’. The measurement of a ‘day’ is the amount of time it takes one point on earth to turn around and face the sun at the same horizontal angle. Therefore, prior to the Earth’s creation the term ‘day’ has no real meaning. We can try to expand our awareness to prior to the dawn of the Earth and attempt to measure that in ‘days’ but it is mighty difficult to do so, as the cosmic events occuring do not have the object by which a ‘day’ is measured available to measure it. Certainly you might have a fairly good idea of how long a ‘foot’ is, but without a ruler or some other object you have decided is a ‘foot’ you cannot be assured of any sort of accuracy. So if the Earth was created on the 6th ‘day’, how can we possibly measure how long any of the other days involved in creation were? Perhaps we are still within the 7th day by god’s cosmic calendar, and that is why god sometimes seems to be an absentee landlord.
This leads to other logical fallacies like claiming that the Sun does not revolve around the Earth. Any fixed point in the cosmos can ostensibly be considered the “center”, it is merely a reference point. If the Earth ‘spins’ and we consider the center to be a fixed point then the Earth is not spinning, but the rest of the universe is orbiting the Earth or at least the centerpoint of the Earth. So depending upon your reference point, the Sun or the Earth are the center, and either or is orbiting the other.
Evolution is self-evident. If two people fuck, the offspring is the genetic aggregate of the two. The fact that every single person is different should clue one into the possibility that there is some minor form of evolution going on. Not to mention that technology changes, each generation is different. For instance, my friends from Westchester do not have the nasally jewish accent that their mother has, nor do most jewish kids from my generation have that stereotypical Fran Drescher accent. That is evolution. If you expand your field of view to thousands or millions of years, you will begin to understand how one species can change into another over time.
As has been said, while the idea of Creation is pretty integral to any faith that has EVOLVED from Judaism, and the faiths that Judaism evolved from. However, it is not the central theme. The central theme is the life of Jesus Christ. Now, Jesus lived 2005 years ago, and our calendar uses his supposed birth year as it’s center point. So Christ’s life has become one of those central points by which we measure other points. This gives him a godlike status. However, I would not claim that christ is god, for to me that is idolatry, yet I still claim myself to be a Christian. Christ has been such an integral part of my life because we share a birthday, or at least I share a birthday with Mithras, a Persian angel who’s allegory shares a striking resemblance to that of Christ, and the powers that be, have decided to pin Christ’s birthday to the same day as Mithras’s, or nearer to the solstice or whatever.
Now let’s get on to propaganda. The Romans and the Roman Catholic church have very specifically tried to cultivate the view of Christ throughout the years, as can very readily be shown by the quote from “Augustine de Hippo”. Whether this is for good or ill is purely subjective, as is the view of ANY allegory. Any story that one hears second hand IS allegorical, as it did not happen specifically to you. Any inferences you draw from it, will be your subjective interpretation of an abstraction related to you about the event. If you’ve ever played telephone it becomes quite clear how this story may have been perverted from the time it happened to the present. Whether or not the person lived or performed the acts claimed does not change the allegorical representation.
Now, as I have referred to centers throughout this post, let’s take one of the main themes of Christianity that gets left out so often, that is that christ was the “Sacred Heart”. The allegory as it appears to me seems to be one of that divine nexus where the spiritual and the material come together, or where the emotional and the intellectual come together, or many other possible centerpoints, masculine feminine, good evil. We could go on forever about it, and many people have, but I think it’s very important to see that the heart is a point of reconciliation, where two seemingly disparate ideas come together as one. That is to me what the Christ story is saying, and the fact that it is saying that seeming opposites can even be reconciled at all is evidence of evolution.