Evolution???

[SSTeacher]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

 

[MarcoPolo]

Sure, why not!

JP2 even wrote about this in his letter Truth Cannot Contradict Truth. As long as one does not believe the soul is a product of evolution.

 

[Trishie]

If you do, it is with the understanding that God is the source of creation, and that a time and at a particular level of evolution, He put His own spirit into those creatures who thus became human with bodies but also eternal souls.

Actually not all those whom you mentioned can accept evolution, e g.the fundamentalists who interpret seven days of creation as literal time rather than periods of time. There are those who find it difficult to understand the thoughts and words of a different language and mindset, of a different time and culture.

 

[Jean_1958]

A Catholic can accept the theory of evolution without compromising his or her Christian faith.

Jean

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

Catholics have no problem with evolution, in fact she teaches evolution “AT THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION LIFE BEGINS”. Evolutions definition here is a matter of truth and fact it is not contested by the Catholic church but evolution at conception is taught by the Catholic church.

Now when you get into the “theories” of man evolving from a monkey and not created by God, you only have an opinion and or a “theory” which is not a matter of fact.

Sorry the Catholic church does not deal with uncertainties or guess work of a man’s opinion of a theory. The Catholic church only deals with Spiritual Realities and what God has already revealed to man from his Son Jesus Christ.

This is not to say that science has no place in the Catholic church. One decieves himself for thinking such a thing. Science when done with charity and respect for life and dignity of death will always prove that God exists.

 

[Orogeny]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

Yes (at least in regard to Catholics).

Peace

Tim

 

[kalt]

I do.

 

[Steadfast]

Absolutely.

The creation account given in Genesis is a theoloumenon. This does not mean that there never really was an Adam and Eve, but what it does mean is that the account is given not as a statement about biology but about God’s creation of the universe, man’s place in it and the fall.

I do not think we really need to reconcile science and the creation account since the latter really has nothing to do with the former.

I used to get pretty worked up about evolution meaning that there must have been death in the world before death entered the world but then I realized that the story of the fall could be true without having to be historically factual.

 

[Eucharisted]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons aren’t Christians.

Catholics are free to believe in evolution. Because we believe the seven days of creation story is symbolic to show the sacredness of the Sabbath and because evolution dosen’t say our souls evolved along with our bodies nor say we had more then one pair of parents (Catholics believe souls are immediately created by God at conception and we come from one pair of parents, whom are given the symbolic names Adam and Eve in order to signify their role in salvation history and their historical existence).

I don’t know what non-Catholic Christians believe about creation and evolution, so I can’t say.

 

[tobinatorstark]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

I would assume so just as long it doesn’t interfere with the faith and deny that God created everything.

 

[buffalo]

As long as you believe Eve came from Adam, they were our first parents, they possessed bodily immortality, had preternatural gifts, had freedom from suffering and had infused knowledge.

 

[greggy53]

Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons aren’t Christians.

Catholics are free to believe in evolution. Because we believe the seven days of creation story is symbolic to show the sacredness of the Sabbath and because evolution dosen’t say our souls evolved along with our bodies nor say we had more then one pair of parents (Catholics believe souls are immediately created by God at conception and we come from one pair of parents, whom are given the symbolic names Adam and Eve in order to signify their role in salvation history and their historical existence).

I don’t know what non-Catholic Christians believe about creation and evolution, so I can’t say.

The problem I have with Darwinian (Macro) evolution is that the way it is taught in schools is that there can be no creator, or created beings. The universe and everything in it is an accident. Time plus chance and nothing more. I don’t know how you can reconcile that with Christianity, but there are many that do, and the Church says it’s ok, so it must be OK. For myself someone will have to show me that life can happen accidently, and as far as I know no one has ever witnessed that taking place. There are only two options here. Either life is accidental, or it is created.

 

[JRKH]

Can a Christian (Anglican, Arminian, Baptist, Catholic, Calvinist, Episcopalian, Jehovah’s Witness, Lutheran, Methodist, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Reformed, Seventh–day Adventist, Wesleyan) accept the theory of evolution as fact without compromising his or her Christian faith?

Curiously,
Mick

Yup. In fact I was exposed to it in Catholic Grade School some 40-45 years ago.
Frankly I see no problem. God is Great.

Peace
James

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The problem I have with Darwinian (Macro) evolution is that the way it is taught in schools is that there can be no creator, or created beings. The universe and everything in it is an accident. Time plus chance and nothing more. I don’t know how you can reconcile that with Christianity, but there are many that do, and the Church says it’s ok, so it must be OK. For myself someone will have to show me that life can happen accidently, and as far as I know no one has ever witnessed that taking place. There are only two options here. Either life is accidental, or it is created.

You are simply confusing two things. Science cannot discuss the theological aspects of creation. It is not subject to empirical study. Furthermore, schools are prevented from bringing that aspect of the discussion into the classroom for obvious reasons. You get that side of it in church. Please don’t expect science to teach your child about God. There is plenty in the scientific record to show the development of more complicated species from less complicated species. There really is not issue here at all.

I hope this has helped you understand that there really is no problem here at all.

 

[greggy53]

You are simply confusing two things. Science cannot discuss the theological aspects of creation. It is not subject to empirical study. Furthermore, schools are prevented from bringing that aspect of the discussion into the classroom for obvious reasons. You get that side of it in church. Please don’t expect science to teach your child about God. There is plenty in the scientific record to show the development of more complicated species from less complicated species. There really is not issue here at all.

I hope this has helped you understand that there really is no problem here at all.

Perhaps you are right and I am being simplistic, but there are only two options here. 1) life at some point in the past was created, or 2) At some point in the past life happened accidentally. If there is a 3 rd choice I’d like to hear it.
Now, as far as there being plenty of evidence for evolution. It depends on your definition. The definition commonly in use includes the adaptation of a species to it’s environment over time. It also encompasses the complete change of one species into another, again over time. The first part of the definition I have no quarrel with. The fact that any given species can and will adapt to it’s environment is self evident and everywhere we look in the natural world. However there is no hard evidence that any species (be it ever so small) has ever evolved into another.
If life then is accidental as Darwinian evolution dictates, then there should be hard evidence that life occurs spontaneously…Has this phenomenon ever been documented? It is however a fact that almost all of the life on this planet uses sex in one form or another to procreate. So I believe that the fact that there are literally millions of different life forms on this planet and no one has ever witnessed life coming into existence on it’s own tells us that life had to be created, and sex was a part of that creation to propagate the species. I don’t have to get Religion involved at all to see the gaping holes in Darwinian Evolution. In fact, from where I sit it takes a big leap of faith to believe that life can occur on its own when this has never been observed. I am not challenging anyones faith, I’m just stating my own observations

 

[JRKH]

Perhaps you are right and I am being simplistic, but there are only two options here. 1) life at some point in the past was created, or 2) At some point in the past life happened accidentally. If there is a 3 rd choice I’d like to hear it.

I guess the third cjoice would be that the beginning of life what science calls life was created, God Sparked it, but that Evolution has been how that Life has Grown.

Now, as far as there being plenty of evidence for evolution. It depends on your definition. The definition commonly in use includes the adaptation of a species to it’s environment over time. It also encompasses the complete change of one species into another, again over time. The first part of the definition I have no quarrel with. The fact that any given species can and will adapt to it’s environment is self evident and everywhere we look in the natural world. However there is no hard evidence that any species (be it ever so small) has ever evolved into another.

This is primarily because it is very difficult to demonstrate just “when” one species becomes anothor one. Given that the fosil record is spotty and limitted primarily to "Hard’ tissue such as bones. It isn’t likely that anyone will be able to ever “Prove” the “missing link”. However the evidence available does strongly suggest it.

If life then is accidental as Darwinian evolution dictates, then there should be hard evidence that life occurs spontaneously…Has this phenomenon ever been documented?

No, but then the other side has never been scientifically documented either. For me, I do not need to accept “accidental start” in order to accept the idea that God used evolution.

It is however a fact that almost all of the life on this planet uses sex in one form or another to procreate. So I believe that the fact that there are literally millions of different life forms on this planet and no one has ever witnessed life coming into existence on it’s own tells us that life had to be created, and sex was a part of that creation to propagate the species.

Actually I’m not sure whether almost all life forms use sex. There are certainly a huge number of viruses and other single cell organisms that do not use “Sex”. When the time is right, they just split. I don’t know what the percentage would be though.

I don’t have to get Religion involved at all to see the gaping holes in Darwinian Evolution. In fact, from where I sit it takes a big leap of faith to believe that life can occur on its own when this has never been observed. I am not challenging anyones faith, I’m just stating my own observations

You are absolutely right. The Evolution side is just as much faith based as is the religious side. There is a huge amount that science doesn’t know about evolution, and there is a huge amount that religious don’t know about how God put things together. This is why I just don’t see the problem from a Catholic perspective.

I can see the issue for Sola Scripturists. Any threat to the Bible is, for them, a threat to the TOTAL underpinning of their faith. Catholics have the Bible of course, but we also have Christ’s Church.

Peace
James

 

[greggy53]

Thank you James your arguments are well put.
From your response might I infer that you reject the impersonal, or accitental in favor of the personal and created origin of life?
If so, then we agree where it counts the most.

 

[JRKH]

Thank you James your arguments are well put.
From your response might I infer that you reject the impersonal, or accitental in favor of the personal and created origin of life?
If so, then we agree where it counts the most.

You are correct.
I have always held that Science is always answering Why and then being forced to ask Why again. God is forever in the "Why.

OR

GOD IS - All the rest is details.
(and we know where the devil is )

Peace
James

 

[Bear_Claw]

Now when you get into the “theories” of man evolving from a monkey and not created by God, you only have an opinion and or a “theory” which is not a matter of fact.

Sorry the Catholic church does not deal with uncertainties or guess work of a man’s opinion of a theory.

The way that you address Evolution here is implied to be a loosely based theory with no real proof or science behind it.
Evolution is a fact. Pure and simple.

It’s called the “Theory of Evolution” for a specific reason, but it’s a fact. It’s being observed and proven constantly. Too many examples to mention.

It’s best explained by this matrix I found on Wikipedia, where it compares gravity to evolution, to make it more understandable.
Evolution is a theory and a fact, just like gravity is a theory and a fact:
Read more at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

Let’s look at Gravity first.
Gravity

• Things falling is an observation of the pull of bodies towards each other.
• Bodies pulling towards each other is called gravity.

Gravity is a fact.

Explanations for the facts of gravity:

• Aristotle and Galileo created explanations of the fact of gravity.
  These are now obsolete explanations.
  Newton’s explanation of gravity is approximately correct but required refinement.
  Einstein’s explanation is a refinement of Newton’s explanation of gravity.

Einstein’s explanation is currently the most accepted explanation of the fact of gravity.
Einstein’s explanation of the fact of gravity is called The General theory of relativity.
Gravity is a fact and a theory.

Evolution: * Fruit flies changing generation to generation is an observation of generational organism change. * Organisms changing generation to generation is called evolution.
Evolution is a fact.
Explanations for the facts of evolution: * Lamarckism, Transmutationism and Orthogenesis were created as explanations of the fact of evolution. These are now discredited explanations. * Darwin’s explanation of evolution is approximately correct, but required refinement. * The modern evolutionary synthesis is a refinement of Darwin’s explanation of evolution, which did not include genes in its explanation. This modern synthesis is currently the most accepted explanation of the fact of evolution. The explanation of the fact of evolution provided by the modern synthesis is the latest and most widely accepted Theory of Evolution. Evolution is a fact and a theory.
I’m just setting the record straight.

 

[brkn1]

Natural selection makes sense and is obviously a fact. A stupid animal or human is more likely not to survive and procreate.
Evolution does not make sense to me. Darwin admitted that there were none of the required numerous missing links to prove his theory. There should be tons of missing links, if he was correct. Many of the so called examples turned out to be fakes or false leads.
Evolution is a religion that many of those who reject or dismiss the existence of a Creator love to hold to. It gives them something to hang onto.
I would still like to see some scientists make the most simple form of any sort of life out of a primordial soup with some lightning strikes or whatever. They still can’t even explain what and where a life-force comes from. How does a seed, that has been sitting around for a thousand years, suddenly come to life when some water and the right conditions are present? It was “dead” by all scientific criteria and appearances before that.
I reject evolution.
If the creation account in Genesis involved evolution, that would mean that God’s Word is inaccurate. Such inaccuracy would make the rest of Scripture suspect.
The first man was formed from the dust of the earth and God breathed the breath of life into him. Adam was the first human being and he did not “evolve” from a monkey or ape.