Theistic Evolutionist

T

tjguitarz

New Member
Are there any theistic evolutionists around? Specifically someone with a moderate understanding of biochemistry, geology, astronomy, and the science of evolution. I have no one in my life who follows Christ and accepts evolution, and I need a mature friend to bombard with questions.
 
I had a professor in college (physics professor who was a strong Christian) who believed in evolution...and that God did it. It's not that uncommon a viewpoint, but I imagine it is hard enough to find people like that...especially if you're looking for people who would admit it in church.... Anyway, this professor hated the terms "evolutionist" and "Creationist" because he didn't like the connotation that they have to be mutually exclusive. I'm by no means an expert in those areas of science, but I might suggest a book for you. I can't really remember much of the book, to be honest, but I remember it being interesting. I got it for an honors class in college called Show Me God (like the title of the book), taught by the same professor I mentioned before.
http://www.amazon.com/Show-Me-God-Message-Telling/dp/1885849532

Edit: As I recall, the book might not directly answer your questions, but I thought of it because it's kind of related.
 
By saying "accepting evolution" are you meaning that God had us evolved from apes as defined in Maco-evolution, or that God uses micro-evolution, that is variations between kinds of animals (short people, tall people, long haired dogs, short haired dogs, etc.)?
 
Since tj talked about biochemistry, geology, astronomy, etc, I was thinking more of the origins of the earth and young vs old earth theory rather than apes when I typed my previous post.... So now that I think about it, maybe that sounded kind of random....
 
I also have a professor and good friend who is a theistic evolutionist. I could attempt to hook you up with him at some point (probably via facebook,) but his area of expertise is in O.T. studies, such as the reconstruction of Dead Sea texts and that sort of thing, not "hard science."

Still, I would trust this guy to be an extremely solid Christian, and one that doesn't just "write off the Bible account" even though he believes in the theory of evolution.
 
after the amount of evolution/creationism debates that I've been involved in, I've grown much more accepting of evolution. When it all comes down to it, I just have to accept the fact that I will probably never know for certain how we became the species that we are... and I can be content with that. I'm not going into science in college, so I will probably never understand, and it's too hard for me to blindly accept something so controversial.

So although I can't help you, I do wish you good luck in your.. travels? One thing I've learned is to make sure that our faith is not based off of something that is unimportant within the vast scheme of things. IE: I believe Jesus was born of a virgin but in all honesty, that isn't a foundation of my faith and if in some unfathomable way it was possible to prove that wrong, my faith wouldn't crumble. In a much easier example, people who make the story of Adam and Eve a foundation in their faith are making a mistake, because the Adam and Eve story (taken literally) is unimportant to the big picture... obviously the meaning from it (man has free will, we choose sin.. death = our fault) is important to understand but believing everyone came from them isn't. (I ramble sometimes)
 
Stc95 said:
By saying "accepting evolution" are you meaning that God had us evolved from apes as defined in Maco-evolution, or that God uses micro-evolution, that is variations between kinds of animals (short people, tall people, long haired dogs, short haired dogs, etc.)?
Click to expand...

Micro-evolution is mostly cellular degradation due to generations of inbreeding. Getting dogs with a certain trait by taking other dogs with that trait to get a dog you like actually goes against the theory of evolution as many of those types of dogs would die in the wild.

Height, eye colour, skin colour, etc. isn't really evolution, it isn't based on genetics, it involves more or less of certain chemicals that are actually not related to DNA. (white people can give birth to a black child and vice-versa, two blond people can have a child with black hair)
 
I loves me a good evolution discussion! I think evolution is bunk, but that it doesn't contradict the Bible. However, I've spent a lot of time on the subject. Post away tj, and if there's anything I can't answer well, I'm sure someone else will do a better job.
 
RyanB said:
I loves me a good evolution discussion! I think evolution is bunk, but that it doesn't contradict the Bible. However, I've spent a lot of time on the subject. Post away tj, and if there's anything I can't answer well, I'm sure someone else will do a better job.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the problem is no evidence. People state that fossils of creatures that are no longer around point to evolution, but it doesn't. The fossils point to the fact their used to be other creatures that no longer exist, humans do a fine job of getting rid of species like the dodo, so just because a creature is no longer around, doesn't mean it evolved into something else necessarily, doesn't mean it didn't either there is just no evidence either way.
 
grimsauce said:
after the amount of evolution/creationism debates that I've been involved in, I've grown much more accepting of evolution. When it all comes down to it, I just have to accept the fact that I will probably never know for certain how we became the species that we are... and I can be content with that. I'm not going into science in college, so I will probably never understand, and it's too hard for me to blindly accept something so controversial.

So although I can't help you, I do wish you good luck in your.. travels? One thing I've learned is to make sure that our faith is not based off of something that is unimportant within the vast scheme of things. IE: I believe Jesus was born of a virgin but in all honesty, that isn't a foundation of my faith and if in some unfathomable way it was possible to prove that wrong, my faith wouldn't crumble. In a much easier example, people who make the story of Adam and Eve a foundation in their faith are making a mistake, because the Adam and Eve story (taken literally) is unimportant to the big picture... obviously the meaning from it (man has free will, we choose sin.. death = our fault) is important to understand but believing everyone came from them isn't. (I ramble sometimes)
Click to expand...

wow those are all extremely important things to have faith based on. I am blown away by you casually dismissing it all. I pretty much disagree with everything you posted. I too hope that the OP finds a great mind to pick, but I will be praying its not an emergent one.
 
Last edited:
ewoksrule said:
wow those are all extremely important things to have faith based on. I am blown away by you casually dismissing it all. I pretty much disagree with everything you posted. I too hope that the OP finds a great mind to pick, but I will be praying its not an emergent one like the above poster.
Click to expand...

I assume you're referring to virgin birth. And by that you're saying that if for some reason Jesus was not born of a virgin, you're entire belief system and faith would be shattered? I don't understand why that should be that case. Although I find the virgin birth important, I do not find it foundational to my faith. Instead, I find the acts of Jesus and his lessons foundational.

If you're also talking about Adam and Eve as taken literal, I can explain why I don't put my faith in that. The Old Testament, to me, is a book of faith and lessons. Adam and Eve teaches us things like God is the Creator of everything we know, he created us good, we chose evil, etc. But, whether Adam and Eve were real is completely irrelevant... There are only so many things that I can say that I know- things I don't really need faith to believe. I mean I personally don't really believe it's literal, but that's not important to my point

And I can't say that I appreciate you dismissing what I've said as some emergent or immature opinion. I have worked and am constantly working out my faith and can back up my reasoning. thanks though, no hard feelings on this end :D
 
ewoksrule said:
wow those are all extremely important things to have faith based on. I am blown away by you casually dismissing it all. I pretty much disagree with everything you posted. I too hope that the OP finds a great mind to pick, but I will be praying its not an emergent one.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I don't really see grimsauce making any claims there. He isn't saying he believes evolution, just that he's accepting it's possibility. He isn't saying Jesus was not born of a virgin or that the Genesis account is a metaphor. He's just stating that these things are in the realm of possibility, and that they ultimately don't matter as far as how we are to live our lives - by choosing God.

Edit: Bah, ninja'd. See above.
 
Last edited:
Every word of the bible down to its punctuation is inspired of God. It is exactly what he wants us to know and believe. To say that things like the virgin birth and the authenticity of Adam and Eve could be wrong or that the Word of God is just a book of faith and lessons is not just an immature one, it is heretical in my opinion. It is clearly emergent in thought as Rob Bell in his book made a big issue of this exact same topic and has been labeled a heretic by most of orthodox Christianity.

These things do matter and have huge importance in how we are to live our lives as God has chosen us to.

No offence meant Grim, I just don't agree with you is all, and I happen to think that your line of questioning of the bible/faith is a dangerous one. I am not dismissing it, I am pointing it out and saying my opinion.
 
Last edited:
To don on my quasi-moderator hat I'd just like to give a friendly reminder to debate with civility. In the grand scheme of things we are all brothers and sisters and like siblings we have disagreements, but we still live under the Father and can act accordingly. However, I don't want to squelch discussion, so just make sure take into consideration the feelings of others in your posts.


Grimsauce:
I think what Ewok is trying to say is that those are pretty universally fundamental to the Christian religion. If Jesus wasn't born of a virgin then that wouldn't make him the Son of God, however there still is the Resurrection to claim that Jesus is Christ, but it just rocks the boat. Also, Adam and Eve, if literally believe, mean that we all come from the same decedents and we all get salvation from the Messiah. Looking at the gospels, certain gospels are tailored to specific readers. Luke wrote mostly to Gentiles to show that Jesus is the Savior of all men. Like in other gospels he gives the family tree of Jesus, but instead of stopping at King David and Abraham,the first Jew, like Matthew did (who was writing to the Jews), Luke goes all the way back to Adam and Eve to associate Jesus with Gentiles as well as with Jews.

I am glad tho that you are able to have a solid foundation in your faith and can roll with the punches. That is something people envy and what more Christians need. Most just follow whatever their pastor says, and crumble at the first hints of opposition. But that you're able to take criticism and you have the ability to re-evaluate yourself and your beliefs is admirable.

"...stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord..." 1st Corinthians 15:58
 
Thanks STC.

As for questioning things...
I will speak for myself and say...I follow a similar thought process as Grim. I question everything. As far as whether or not this is "dangerous" or not, I think that is is far more dangerous to accept things without question.

If you accept truths without question...you will also accept lies without question. And worse, you won't even know it.

When I question things...I'm not questioning God or His word. I'm questioning my own interpretation of that word. We don't always get it right. There's a lot more I'd love to say on the subject, but I figure it'd be better to stay on the topic at hand. Maybe we should start some sort of "open mind?/interpreting the bible" thread at some point.
 
Thanks STC, you said much on the lines I was coming from. I agree that we are derailing this thread, I apologize OP.


RyanB said:
If you accept truths without question...you will also accept lies without question. And worse, you won't even know it.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree there, but another thread perhaps? :)
 
Ember said:
I had a professor in college (physics professor who was a strong Christian) who believed in evolution...and that God did it. It's not that uncommon a viewpoint, but I imagine it is hard enough to find people like that...especially if you're looking for people who would admit it in church.... Anyway, this professor hated the terms "evolutionist" and "Creationist" because he didn't like the connotation that they have to be mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

This is something I feel very passionate about. In fact, I came to know Christ largely as a result of studying evolution. (or lack there of?) I'll try my best to explain why even though creation/evolution are not mutually exclusive...they "essentially" are.

A lot of folks (mainly atheists) try to think of atheists as "free thinkers". They aren't "trapped" into a certain line of thinking by doctrine, whereas the Bible forces us to think a certain way. This is how I thought as a teenager. I was very "smart" (and very proud of it!), and felt very intellectually superior to the fools worshipping an imaginary genie in the sky. Studying evolution made me realize it was full of "holes" without good answers...which left me with the question of "well, how the heck did we get here then?". It wasn't until then that I honestly began seeking.

As for mutual exclusivity:
Obviously the Genesis account kind of precludes the idea of us evolving the entire way from one-celled organisms. However, nothing says that Adam and Eve didn't look like they could be in a Geico commercial. I think this is an area where I see a lot of Christians have trouble...they think science is an instrument of the devil to trick us. But really, science is supposed to be a study of truth. And what is more truth than the truth of God's creation? Anyway, natural "science is the devil" bias aside, I think that Christians are completely unbound by the Bible in the matter. We can look at it, decide if there's good science/evidence, and choose to believe or disbelieve accordingly.

So, long story short, an open-minded Christian can accept that some form of evolution could exist...without short-changing the Genesis account.

This is not so for the athiest, though. Everyone is curious as to how we got here. But how else can we naturally explain our presence? No amount of "adaptation" can change a species...it has to be built into our genetic code. Therefor, any type of "how did we get here" must involve genes. Also, genetic changes would have to be simple, as our building blocks are far too complicated for large, sudden changes. In other words, any "natural" explanation to how we came into being must involve simple changes to genes. There is no other way to explain it.

So what we're left with is a house of cards. There are so many pieces to evolution that if any single piece is "wrong", the entire theory fails. So if you look at the theory as a whole and consider...
  • Lack of fossil records
  • Irreducible complexity
  • Time (for example, ice age till now is not nearly long enough on evolutionary scale for the amount of "evolution" we've had)
  • Lots of other stuff (really, there are a ton of links in this chain)

You are left with is a very unproven, untested, and very unlikely theory. So the reason these things are often exclusive? Occam's Razor.

  • The Christian looks at this theory and says, "well, I know God created us, so really no reason to believe in this unlikely theory."
  • The atheist rejects the possibility of a designer, so the unlikely theory becomes the most likely in their mind. This person will look at Stonehenge, a circle of rocks, and say "obviously designed". Then they will look at a cell with hundreds of gigantic, unique cellular machines, all necessary (check it out sometime if you haven't)...litterally trillions and trillions of times the complexity...and call you an idiot if you don't believe it spontaneously popped into existence.
 
Great post, RyanB.

I guess my feeling on the subject is this: There are essential tenets of the Christian faith (obviously), and then there are some non-essentials. A lot of the non-essential things are the things that separate one denomination from the other, etc. But there may be some other things.

Something that IS essential is the belief that God is the Creator of Heaven and Earth. Something I don't think is necessarily essential is the particular interpretation of exactly how He did it or how long it took. So if (when), for instance, a brother or sister in Christ believes God used the Big Bang Theory to get stuff done, I won't consider that person less of a Christian or even bother trying to convince him otherwise.

So if at least some of this stuff falls under the non-essential category (again, it's essential to believe that God did it, but supposing HOW he did it is non-essential), I feel like we shouldn't make it a huge obstacle for someone coming to Christ. I don't want non-believers to immediately reject Christianity because they assume they'll have to throw all their scientific notions out the window. Then, if they're more inclined to investigate Christianity, and if they become a Christian (accepting that God is the Creator), then their belief of how God created everything will be between them and God.

Edit: I don't know if it's even necessary to say this, but to clarify, I'm not talking about things that clearly contradict the biblical account of Creation. I'm talking about the things that are open to interpretation.
 
Last edited:
Ember said:
So if at least some of this stuff falls under the non-essential category (again, it's essential to believe that God did it, but supposing HOW he did it is non-essential), I feel like we shouldn't make it a huge obstacle for someone coming to Christ. I don't want non-believers to immediately reject Christianity because they assume they'll have to throw all their scientific notions out the window. Then, if they're more inclined to investigate Christianity, and if they become a Christian (accepting that God is the Creator), then their belief of how God created everything will be between them and God.
Click to expand...

Aye, but what about those people who cling to their scientific beliefs and spurn Christianity. If someone were to intelligently tell them about Creationism or Intelligent Design if you want to keep it more secular, then wouldn't that person have a better chance at accepting Christ? I feel that a lot of people these days ignore Christianity because it "doesn't make sense" both spiritually (why would God care about me?) and "scientifically" (the Earth was created by nothing exploding and we serve no purpose, therefore I don't need Jesus).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top