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 The evidence based Stig on
-
Dave
The church used to hold the view that the earth was fixed. Now it does not. What changed? Scripture didn't but our knowledge on how the world works did. Your explanation of this change in stance regarding fixed earth based on this is what I am waiting for.
I am interested in what the author meant. But whilst we shouldnt get text to say more than it does, we shouldn't get it to say less either. I have stated in many previous posts and articles how I read genesis and what I think god is trying to convey in the text. I agree its about god and I have had no indication from him that I'm wrong in my interpretation. It does not affect my relationship with him.
Many scientists including Christian ones disagree with your stance on the theory of evolution. Many don't. Tells me this issue is not a simple one. But I will simply restate my point from minute one - even if the theory of evolution is true, it has no impact on the issue of gods existence or the message of genesis (as demonstrated by the fixed earth issue)
-
-
Interesting thought and an example of taking things to literal.
Adam from adamah meaning earth ground soil dirt dust actually containd another word dam meaning blood. Look carefully what does that sound like. In the literal sense.
-
-
Permalink Reply by David Velasquez on
-
Grazer,
>>The church used to hold the view that the earth was fixed. Now it does not. What changed? Scripture didn't but our knowledge on how the world works did. Your explanation of this change in stance regarding fixed earth based on this is what I am waiting for.
The explanation is a simple one and one that is found in my previous posts to you. The theologians of the time had inserted their own interpretations into scripture and made scripture say something it didn't. That has been happening since the books and letters of the bible were written. It is one of the reasons the Roman Catholic Church did not want the scriptures to be translated into the common language. The interpretation of the church was in error in that chapter. Science has made thousands of mistakes as well, so what is the big deal about this incident? Copernicus and his followers repudiated the old Ptolemaic view of astronomy. They argued that the center of the solar system is not the earth (geocentricity), but the sun (heliocentricity). They were correct, but the bible never taught anything different.
Are you equating the incident to the discovery of mechanisms created by God and necessary for life to be sustained?>>I agree its about god and I have had no indication from him that I'm wrong in my interpretation.
I doubt your interpretation is your interpretation. A reading of scripture will never lead you to believe that God set into place mechanisms to create life. You would understand without a shadow of a doubt, that God created everything in 24 hour days. You are reading the works of very liberal Christians Scientists, who only God knows the motive of their heart, that are trying to make evolutionary theory acceptable to Christianity. But that is not your biblical interpretation. That bible has no room for that.
-
-
-
Actually not only the church much of mankind held that view. And rightfully so they didn't have there abilities we have now nor did they have the information we have now. The evolution of knowledge and ability has allowed us to evolve in our thinking.
As for scripture the way it is written one could get the impression the earth is the center of all. When you look out into the horizon especially on a flat plain or ocean one could get the impression the earth is flat. But again the evolution of travel and the evolution of knowledge has caused us to evolve in our thinking.
-
-
-
Dean,
It would appear that you are on a crusade to rescue the word "evolution" hahaha from its immediate attachment to evolutionary theory. I see you like to use the word for its other meanings. This discussion is not about giving the word evolution a bad name. It's about discussing the compatibility of Evolutionary theory with the bible, so no one here is against the word. The word is simply a word.
Blessings
-
-
-
May I ask what you are saying here
Common substance does not equate to common source. It may appear that way and it does seemed to be a logical conclusion, but the gap in the DNA from a chimpanzee to a human is a vast one in DNA structure. Too great to be bridge by chance or a mechanism left themselves to figure it out. Common substance does call for the same creator.
Common substance does call for same creator therefore utimately common source God.
-
-
Following from this, I never said the gap was bridged by chance or the mechanism to figure out itself. I am postulating mechanism by design. This is not a new concept but is treading into a "god of the gaps" argument.
-
-
Grazer
I know what the position you are presenting believes, is not a difficult position to understand. God created mechanism which by His design generated life. That is a lot different from the theory of evolution.
However, finding mechanisms in place does not automatically mean the mechanisms are responsible for the life we have now. Rather God created life forms that in order to live need a chemical balance, DNA codes, and mechanisms. It would be an insult to God to say he didn’t have the ingenuity to devise a system for progressive evolution (micro) as needed in the very world he created. Evolution (micro) within each species. God selects who lives and who dies among his creation and not natural selection as understood by the people who put their faith in the theory of evolution.
He is aware of a sparrow falling from the sky. That is not a huge task for the God we serve. He is everywhere and upholds everything.
As Christians we do not need to believe God created and set in place mechanisms, which generated life. The bible does not support that and science has not given us conclusive evidence to support it either. Evolutionary thought has been around for a long time, it goes back to Aristotle and Lucretius in their vague concept in ‘ladder of nature’. Yet the inconsistencies with the theory remain.
Finding mechanisms in a complex being does not mean at all that those mechanisms were set in place by God to bring about life, through small genetic changes. The only thing mechanisms proof is the complexity of life and the immense wisdom of our God. How beautiful He is. How perfect and Holy.
-
-
The only thing mechanisms proof is the complexity of life and the immense wisdom of our God. How beautiful He is. How perfect and Holy
Whilst I disagree with your use of the word only, Amen to the rest of it!!
-
-
-
Dean -
Common substance does not equate to common source as believed by the proponents of evolutionary theory.
Common substance does not call for the same creator automatically, there could be other causes of creation, but as bible believing Christians, we do know that we have one source of creation, our creator, God almighty.
-
-
Oh ok I see what you are saying yet as we read scripture we do see that God created it all from the dust of the earth. All except earth itself therefore common source common substance. Which still does not equate to Darwin's theory.
-
-
3 gAs I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not hto teach any different doctrine, 4 nor ito devote themselves to myths and endless jgenealogies, which promote kspeculations rather than the stewardship1 from God that is by faith. 5 The aim of our charge is love lthat issues from a pure heart and ma good conscience and na sincere faith. 6 Certain persons, by oswerving from these, have wandered away into pvain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, qwithout understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make confident assertions.
Welcome to
All About GOD
The Good News
Meet Face-to-Face & Collaborate
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com.
Powered by
