Is Christianity Compatible with Evolution?

Great Debates
1

Is Christianity compatible with Evolution?

I know that this is probably one of the oldest questions debated on this board, but as I am a relative newcomer, I would like to know what people think about it.

Up and until very recently I have never considered the two to be in conflict. I have always taken the fossil record, the geological age of the Earth, and many other scientific discoveries to support evolution. However, conflict arise with Christianity in the very definition of evolution. Evolution assumes that if there is a God, then that God does not interact with the physical world. In other words, God, if he exists, is not and has not been important in the change in species over time. If we continue we this logic, then we must assume that God still does not interact in the present for evolution to be continuing. Because if at any point, God does interact with the physical world, then a supernatural form of selection would be introduced.

That is where I see the conflict with evolution and Christianity (as well as most other religions). God can not answer prayers, can not heal, can not protect, can not encourage, can not comfort without having an impact on the natural world. For example, if God was to intercede upon a young person who was about to be run over by a bus by having him trip before he made it to the street, the young person would now live and have an effect on the gene pool that that person could not have made before. And who knows what social changes this person may then make, it could had been Martin Luther King, Walt Disney, or Ronald Reagan. This all effects the development of our species via supernatural selection.

This is all not to say that Christianity is in conflict with the notion that species change over time, the fossil record does provide strong evidence for this. It is only the process of change that I question. And this also not to say that natural selection does not occur, just that they may be instances in which supernatural selection may also occur. So to answer my own question, Christianity and Evolution do not appear to be compatible, as one requires supernatural intervention while the other precludes it.

2

I don’t think they are mutually exclusive at all. It depends on your interpretation of things. Some people insist that the Bible must be taken literally, which means that God really did make everything in seven days, all at once. Others realize that the Bible is full of metaphors and parables. There’s no reason why you can’t believe in evolution and God, IMO.

3

Trout:
One thing you should realize is that a single individual has nil influence on the gene pool (unless the population is very small). So Divine Intervention on such an individual’s behalf would have no effect on humanity in an evolutionary sense.

The problem with ‘supernatural selection’ is this: if God throws His divine monkey-wrench into the physical workings of the universe at any point, then we poor humans are left with the conclusion that we cannot ever really know anything. We can come up with natural laws all we like, but in the end, these laws turn out to be nothing more than an illusion, since God is actually running the show.

In a quest for understanding, however, this notion is not satisfactory. In order to even hope to understand the world around us, scientists must start with one of two basic assumptions: a) God does not exist, or b) God, if He does exist, does not meddle. Either of these cases has the same net effect - the Natural Laws, as we perceive them, are real, and we can thus work to understand them.

This, of course, applies to all sciences, not just evolution. However, evolution earns a special notoriety among Creationist Christians because it, in part, answers the question, “Where do we come from?” The evolutionist’s answer (“We share a common ancestor with apes.”) differs radically from the Creationist’s answer (“God created us.”).

Many Christians, as friedo pointed out, simply accept the metaphorical interpretation of Genesis, and are content with option b) from the above two basic assumptions (with the stipulation the God perhaps set everything into motion [i.e, The Big Bang was His work], then stepped back from the process, aside from some occasional direct influence in human history).

The die-hard fundamentalists (literalists?), however, are not so content. And I think the primary reason for this non-acceptance of evolution above all other sciences is because they do not wish to be likened unto mere animals. Thus, in order to maintain their perceived superiority over all creation, they must resort to a literal interpretation of the Bible, which, of course, is very much at odds with evolution; they cannot both be true. However, to accept such an interpretation, one must literally close one’s mind to all evidence to the contrary…

4

Sure, My Church assumes Evolution, and the current theories of the earth, humans etc, are all more or less correct, just that G-D stepped in & “gave a helping hand” at a few spots, such as the begining of life, and the first humans, etc. Does answer some tough questions, ya gotta admit.

5

Your post makes me wonder, Daniel: where do you believe god came in, man-wise?

Do you think evolution would not have produced man otherwise? Do you believe god inserted a soul into a product of evolution?

Honestly curious; would appreciate some elaboration, if possible.

6

It has been my experience that most people don’t like it when you call them monkeys.

I’ve never seen a conflict with evolution and the belief structure of Christianity. But it does bring up a good question. If evolution is true, why did God take so long in granting a particular species free will, i.e. a sense of themselves as apart from the rest of the world. It would seem that the argument for us being the chosen of God would be at odds with this theory. If we were created we would have been given this gift right away. With evolution we appear to be just the current end of a random physical process. Our free will wasn’t given to us, it was the result of random mutations in a constantly changing enviroment. And if that’s the case, is it really free will?

But while the evolution theory seems sound, it has been pointed out that we can only observe it through advancements in present theorys and highly sketchy fossil records. History, as always, is just informed conjecture. As far as I know, there is no really convincing argument in exactly how human consciousness came into being. (If I’m wrong on this point, feel free to inform me; I would be greatly interested.) One of my math teachers pointed out that there are quite a few factors in the basic makeup of the universe, that if they were changed in the slightest, life would not be possible. (He didn’t elaborate on that fact though, so I wonder what these factors are.)

I’d also imagine that the fact that many researchers consider “God” an invention of man doesn’t sit to well with many Christians. And the fact that the Judeo-Christian viewpoint, while present in most of the world, is not quite universal.

If I was to venture a theory from my somewhat sophomoric observations, I’d say this:
If there was a validity to a god who created the world it would go like this. He started up this universe as an experiment/game. He began it with some very basic rules, of course leaving it wide open. Beginning with the big bang he watched how his creation played itself out, noting the idiosyncracies that arised. (For a small scale example, look up the game of life, where several patterns emerge from a very basic set of rules.) If he decided to intervene, he of course would do it from within the rules of the game. This so his creation would never be able to pinpoint an outside influence.

That last bit would be an idiosyncracy of God. The fact that he put himself in a place where we would never be able to definitely say that he exists. There would be no point in faith if we could.

Well, I’ll end this here. This post just ended up going all over the place. “Sound and fury, signifying nothing.” From now on I’ll leave the philsophy to the professionals.

7

There may well have been an inteligent, tool-using humanoid, but I think the soul was our “creation” so to speak. The soul allows us to do things like wonder where we came from, is there an afterlife, and other such things. It appears, that even dolphins & chimps, who are really quite smart, don’t cross this line. Ie, G-d “created” “man” by inserting a soul into an intelligent, but not fully aware humaniod.

Maybe this answers the question, of who Cain married- near-humans without a soul. I would say that the neanderthal would be that near-human, but it appears they did have “religion” of sorts. So, maybe that fine line when man 1st became Homo Sapiens was when the soul 1st appeared. And, altho I beleive my G-d certainly was responsible for the gift of a soul to mankind, that does not mean other gods were not also as generous, and did the same.

So, once G-d had set up this wonderful Earth with DNA & evolution & all, He would not have to “meddle” again for millions of years.

8

As a short answer to the OP, I certainly hope that Christianity is compatible with Evolution.

I mean, I am certain that at my Judgement there will be plenty of reason to deny me Paradise, but I would hate to think I was trying to emulate a being Who would use an appreciation of how biology really works against me. If He didn’t want me to accept that evolution is the most parsimonious explanation for the variety and relationships of life on Earth, He shouldn’t have made the whole world look that way. Anything else is more worthy of the Adversary (or Loki), but that cannot be since the Adversary only has power to twist a man’s thoughts, he has no “creative” powers of his own.

I don’t see where “belief” in evolution impacts my morality or whether I do as Jesus instructed (something to do with Love God and Love your neighbor as I recall). Except maybe that by recognizing that the interrelationship of all life on Earth is a family relationship, I may have a more inclusive definition of “neighbor” than others.

In case it is not clear, I do not choose to follow a God Who can be limited by the words in any book about our relationship with Him. A fanatical worship of the words and language of the Bible blinds people to the real wonders of this Creation.

9

Before I go off to work this morning, does anyone want to start a thread “Is Creationism Compatible with Christianity?”

10

IIRC, the Roman Catholic Church thinks so. The RCC accepts evolution but adds that God guides it all.
(not being a member of the RCC, someone please correct me on this if I’m wrong)

11

**Trout wrote:

Up and until very recently I have never considered the two to be in conflict. I have always taken the fossil record, the geological age of the Earth, and many other scientific discoveries to support evolution. However, conflict arise with Christianity in the very definition of evolution. Evolution assumes that if there is a God, then that God does not interact with the physical world. In other words, God, if he exists, is not and has not been important in the change in species over time. If we continue we this logic, then we must assume that God still does not interact in the present for evolution to be continuing. Because if at any point, God does interact with the physical world, then a supernatural form of selection would be introduced.**

A couple of points.

  1. Evolution doesn’t mention god(s)in any way. It neither confirms nor denys their existence and rightly so. Evolution is concerned with changes in species and populations over long periods of time. Evolution concerns itself with biology not theology.

  2. As mentioned before the Roman Catholic Church, I believe, issued a Papal Bull saying that evolution is fine and not in conflict with Christianity. I believe most of the other churches have implicitly agreed with this. The only ones who haven’t are the Biblical Literalist, those who insist on taking the biblical text literally.

  3. You seem to imply that if (the) God(s) were to make some sort of effect in the natural world, it’d be right out of Hollywood with flashy lights and smoke, etc. I have the feeling if (the)God(s) do intervene (and I believe they do), it’d be much more subtle, like a photon of energy coming at just the right time and place to change a strand of DNA in a species to start a mutation.

12

The thing I’ve wondered about is that many of the arguments of the eary “Doctors of the Church” (St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas and other such heavy hitters) are based upon analogies between Adam and Jesus, since both are direct “Sons of God”. When you switch over to a belief in Evolution such an analogy gets muddied at best, and more likely torn apart. So what does this do to longstanding Church theology? I’ve never heard anyone address this issue.

13

Evidently, sir, you have never been at one of my family reunions. I have proof positive Darwin was right every time I go to one.

This strikes me as being a rather context-dependent argument. I don’t see a lot of problem with God taking ten billion years from Big Bang to humans, because

A) The possibility exists that God values all life, not just those aware of His existence, and
B) Ten billion years isn’t necessarily a long time if you’re God.

God seems to have chosen to create a universe wherein we perceive the passage of time. Everything takes a measureable amount of time to happen. Given that, it seems irrelevant as to whether it took us ten billion years, or five billion years, or a couple of weeks to attain our present level of consciousness.

What most non-nutty Christians will say here is that your two points here don’t contradict. God chose to create everything via a big bang; it’s no better or worse a method of creating a universe than anything else. If it was part of His plan that we get free will in this particular manner, hey, why not?

If you’re assuming the existence of an omnipotent God, it seems kind of silly to criticize the way He’s cooked things up by asserting it took too long.

I think it’s important to note that many of the underlying parts of your argument are things that might not apply to God. Concepts like time and cause-and-effect are things God created, if in fact He created everything. You cannot apply those limitations to God if you’re operating on the assumption He created the universe, because those are laws within the confines of our universe and we cannot assume they have any application to an omnipotent being.

14

Trout said:

I don’t think God, if he exists, would consider it so. If he truly is responsible for our design and the mechanism by which we grow and change and reproduce (DNA, mutations, etc.), he should feel that he has a hand in every change that takes place, for he initiated the sequence. He could have initiated it with every change planned out, and just made a system that works by itself instead of having to guide it every step of the way. And if he really knows what’s going to happen before it happens (which I’m under the impression that his followers-at least Christians-believe he does), then he would have been able to foresee the outcome of this system’s workings and orchestrate desired changes accordingly. Also, as Mauve Dog brought to my attention, who knows if he did throw in a kink here and there; to us (or at least the scientific community) it would be perceived as nature’s work or an anomaly (depending upon the scenario) anyway.

DrFideliussaid:

I think you put that brilliantly. Should be in a book somewhere. :smiley:

Mofo Rising:
lovin’ that sig

15

Aren’t you supposed to be in class or something?? :p:p:p

16

Hi peoples.
When I was a sophomore, my uncle was the Bishop of one of the local LDS Wards. Very respected man. He was also a scientist and taught science at my high school. I was in his biology class. He did not shy away in the slightest from teaching us evolution. And he did a bang-up job. This confused me. He was a Bishop, called by God. Yet he was teaching evolution. What was up with that?
So I asked him.
He told me that God is the Divine Scientist. The laws of the Universe we mortals must follow, God must follow as well, to a certain extent. There are always miracles, etc etc. Anyway, he believed that God got the wheels spinning, set everything up the way it should be, then let things proceed in their natural course. If He was to intervene on a regular basis, it would be paramount to voiding the whole idea of Free Will.
Of course, The Mormon Church doesn’t believe that the whole “7 days” was REALLY “7 days”. More like each “day” was thousands, if not millions of years.

17

As I remember from HS ‘evolution’ goes someting like this.

1 Big Bang
2 Cosmic dust collects into planets
3 Eventually oceans form
4 single cell life in ocean starts and developes
5 life moves to land
6 and air
7 then you get your man

Creation goes someting like…

1 Let there be light (I am certain the Big Bang was pretty bright)
2 Heaven and Earth (see step 2)
3 God seperates the earth and the water
4 God brings about all the fish in the sea
5 Then God makes all manner of beasts
6 and Birds of the air
7 and lastly God makes man

It has been a while since I went to Catholic HS but I always thought it was interesting the way the bible has the basic order correct. If one were just writing a ‘story’ one could have God make man first and then the beasts. Heck God could make man and then make the earth.
Anyway this just makes me wonder…

18

**Zebra wrote:

It has been a while since I went to Catholic HS but I always thought it was interesting the way the bible has the basic order correct. If one were just writing a ‘story’ one could have God make man first and then the beasts. Heck God could make man and then make the earth. Anyway this just makes me wonder…**

Try reading Cliff Notes; Mythology which covers many of the western and middle eastern mythological cycles. You’ll discover some striking similarities. This would indicate that they call came from a similar source, probably the oral traditions of the Indo-Europeans.

Which makes me wonder, why do we favor the Judeo-Christian version of this mythology over the others?

19

I said this in one of the other posts but here it is again.

I had a Biology Instructor in College who believed that Evolution was proof that there is a god. His reasoning was that in nature things degenerate and in evolution species become “stronger” and better than before. I’m trying to remember exactly how he said it as it made more sence than me trying to remember it. So to him because there is evolution there is a god.

20

Except the sequence isn’t correct. Sorry. Let me explain:

Everything before this point is the purview of several different sciences other than biological evolution. (1), (2) and (3) are the domain of astrophysics. You skipped a step between (3) and (4): abiogenesis had to happen before there could be single-celled organisms. (4) is where biological evolution really starts.

** Except the Big Bang wasn’t an explosion like an atomic bomb going off or even a stick of dynamite. It was time and space expanding out from a microscopic singularity. There actually was no visible light in the universe till the first stars formed and that was many millions of years afterwards.

Except the Bible has this wrong. It has the Earth being created before the Sun, the Moon and all the other planets and stars. In actuality, the Sun is five billion years old, the Earth 4.3 billion. The Big Bang happened 8 to 9 billion years before the formation of the Sun. Recently, a NASA probe examined the asteroid Eros and it looks like it is about 250,000 years older than the Earth.

Actually, the early Earth’s surface was dry, with water located beneath the crust and suspended in the atmosphere as water vapor. After the Earth’s surface was cool enough, that vapor condensed and there was rain. Also, much of the underground water came out via volcanoes and geysers. (Yeah, it sounds like the Deluge of Noah, but the events I described happened nearly 4 billion years ago, LONG before there was any life, let alone people to build a Big Boat.)

Many other animals pre-dated fish. Trilobites, for example. The Bible also does not say that God allowed any of His creations to go extinct, yet it’s estimated that 99% of all the species there have ever been are extinct now. Many Christians do not believe that God would create a life-form only to allow it to go extinct.

Which means they had a fifty-fifty chance of getting it right. Them is good odds.

Then people would logically ask, “Where did this man live if there was no Earth?”