All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
Science and the evolution of Christianity - scope for understanding?
The Scopes Trial—formally known as The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes and informally known as the Scopes Monkey Trial—was a landmark American legal case in 1925 in which high school science teacher, John Scopes, was accused of violating Tennessee's Butler Act which made it unlawful to teach evolution.[1]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Science v Christianity - Certainly seemed to be the case (literally) in the above mentioned Scopes trial - which effectively was about the doctrine of human origin and evolution. Indeed there were two opposing sides - the scientific and Christian communities, at least that was the public view. The Christian community rejected scientists account of evolution claiming it was unbiblical. Science was wrong!
Is science wrong though? I do not believe it is.
It is some of the scientists who are wrong in their speculations. But I also believe that some in the Christian community should not discount evolution - as a process used by God. I've heard many Christians say "I don't believe in evolution", but there are valid scientific claims in Darwin's theory of evolution; some aspects of his theory were/are obviously speculative.
The creation is another issue that seemingly separates science and Christianity - how old is the universe? Is there a designer? Who created God? etc etc
It is not a case of science v Christianity - rather isn't it a case of science for Christianity? There should be scope for understanding between both communities I believe.
After all - science is only revealing what God has created.
Any thoughts on this?
Views: 2627
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Leonard T on
-
Not at all. You need simply read the Scripture at face value.
In one place God does not describe how He laid the foundation or even what the foundation is. The other He describes the creation straight forward with ample enough detail.
-
Permalink Reply by The evidence based Stig on
-
You need simply read the Scripture at face value.
But scripture rarely lends itself to that stance, plus:
The LORD reigns, he is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed in majesty and armed with strength; indeed, the world is established, firm and secure - Psalm 93:1
Say among the nations, “The LORD reigns.” The world is firmly established, it cannot be moved; he will judge the peoples with equity - Psalm 96:10
Tremble before him, all the earth! The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved - 1 Chronicles 16:30
He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved - Psalm 104:5
The sun rises and the sun sets and hurries back to where it rises - Ecclesiastes 1:5
At face value, the earth doesn't move.
-
-
Face value means:
Take poetry as poetic writing
Take allegory as allegoric writing
Take history as historic writing
Take prophecy as prophetic writing
All of these are found in Scripture.
The key is in determing the style in which a passage or book was written.
-
-
-
The key is in determing the style in which a passage or book was written.
Exactly my point LT. Since the earth does move (it spins on its axis and revolves around the Sun) the above passages aren't historic and they aren't prophetic.
-
-
-
The Psalms are poetry.
Ecclesiastes 1:5: Today our meteorologist every day tell us at what time the sun rise is and at what time the sun set is. The reality is that in the panoramic view of the sky the sun does rise from horizon to eventually the other horizon. The Sun did not move in place, but is viewed at different points in the sky during the day. This view of the sun is common in literay style and scientific communication (ie meteorologist)
1 Chronicles 16 is filled with metaphors as it relates to worship. Here we find metaphors within a historical book.
The key is determining the style in which a passage or book is written. It is imperative that we not read into it what we want, but truly seek to identify the literay style in order to exegete the Word of God correctly.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Amanda on
-
The astronomer, Hugh Ross (his ministry is called Reasons to Believe) has proposed a list of the formation of the universe and the earth exactly as Genesis states. He assumes there was a Big Bang because there has to be an evolutionary cause--so the Creator caused the Big Bang. But that is not in agreement with the Bible. According to him, the sun and moon and stars are all a result of earth’s atmospheric changes and not the literal creation of them. Therefore, there is conflict with the cause of them. Just because science agrees with the order of creation does not mean that we should believe in evolution because we find some parts of science agreeing with the Bible.
Using the scientific method there are two hypotheses:
Creation as written in the Bible tells us how we got here.
Evolution using abiogenesis combined with macroevolution tells us how we got here.There are places where the facts fit under both hypotheses but evolution is still an unproven theory and the scientific evidence actually matches the Bible’s creation account better. If you can find any hard, testable, scientific evidence for evolution, then please share it with me. Really.
I think it does matter whether or not one believes in evolution or a literal 6 days of creation. Why? If we can’t trust what the Bible says about our origin, how can we trust anything else it says? If six days really means something else, then how do we know that Jesus’ statement “no one comes to the Father, but by Me” (John 14:6) doesn’t also mean something else? If all of us did not descend from Adam and Eve and God didn’t really form them as stated in Genesis, then do we really become one flesh? Jesus said, But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. (see Mark 10:5-8). He then added, “so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.” The fact that Jesus said “from the beginning…” cannot mean thousands of years later, can it, like 6000 years later or 6 million?
I give up. How should we interpret Genesis 1 and 2 if not literally?
-
-
Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on
-
-
-
this discussion is very interesting. Amanda the death God warned about is death seperation from God. Adam had not gotten the chance to take of the tree of life therefore was susceptable to physical death. Ultimately the serpent was able to use the physical deciet. Another question I have in the iea of creation is where did the people come from that Adam and his family came across later on
-
-
Dean, you will need to elaborate on what you mean by where did the people come from that Adam and his family came across later on
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.--Genesis 3:20
To me, this is pretty self-explanatory. What people are you talking about?
If Adam’s sin only resulted in spiritual death and not a physical death, why did Jesus have to die a physical death on the cross?
In Genesis 3:19 it says,
‘In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; you are dust, and to dust you shall return.’It sounds like physical death to me was part of God's judgment on Adam for sinning. Returning to the dust can mean only physical death. Why would God say this to Adam if it was going to happen to Adam anyway regardless if he had sinned or not? It would be pointless and Adam would likely have answered, "What's new?"
-
-
remember evolution only means to change and God did an amazing job of changing dust into man. The only question is the how long did God work for creation. well I have to say 6 God days.
Darwins theory of evolution could have been called the theory of change. Then we would have another word we couldn't use.
-
-
Dean, you are free to use any word you like. Those who believe in evolution must believe that death has always existed. I understand that. Those who accept the Bible believe that physical death is a punishment for sin.
-
-
first of all I do not believe in Darwin's theory yes God is the creator. Adam as scripture points out hadn"t taken of the tree of life and to do so would have made him like the god's no death therefore prior to taking of it there was death not to say anyone had died this I do not know. Jesus bore all our sins in the physical death giving us a path to not know the ultimate death spiritual seperation from God. You see Amanda I believe God's thought and our limited knowledge are universes apart. We must get out of the box of our limited knowledge. If we continue in our limited knowledge scripture can be argued in every direction. I spent many years doing so. It was when the Father showed me beyond my limited knowledge that I came to the truth. It any all ways was an evolutionary process complete changE.
I thank The Father for His work.
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
