Theistic Evolution


A caller asks Hank if his view of science and his Christian views can be harmonized by believing God was behind the evolutionary process.

http://www.equip.org, 1-888-7000-CRI

Bible Answer Man

#christiantheology, #doctrinesofchristianity, #branchesoftheology, #christiandoctrines

10 Comments

  1. Xain'd Sleena says:

    Christians try reconcile evolution and the bible by claiming genesis isn’t literal. However i still think there are problems with this.
    1) Jesus and Paul talk about Adam as if he was a real person. Why does the bible give precise ages and locations of people who never existed? Why place them in genealogies that contained real people?
    2) If the Genesis story was gods attempt to describe real events using language that could easily be understood by people of the time, the choice of metaphors is very poor. Why say god created humans from clay and a rib when he really created them from non humans?
    3) Romans 5:12 seems to suggest physical death never existed before he fall in which case one of the main mechanisms of evolution (ie natural selection) was missing for most of life’s history on earth
    4) the bibles sharp delineation between humans and animals seems bizarre. If Adam was gods choice of the first human, this choice would have been arbitrary in the same way as the age that one might decide when a child becomes an adult. Were Adam's parents soulless animals over whom god had given Adam dominion? If Adam was created in god's image, what does this mean? It can’t refer to any physical or mental features because there is no reason to suppose Adams parents would have lacked them since they were the same species.
    5) The whole concept that a omni-benevolent god would have created humans using a process that required trillions upon trillions of deaths, seems inconceivable
    6) I’ve also heard some proponents of theistic evolution claim evolution happened exactly as understood by scientists but god made an exception when he created humans. This ignores all the genetic and fossil evidence that strongly suggests humans evolved from non-humans. Besides how can evolution not apply to humans when we have the main ingredients for a species to evolve ? i.e. heritable traits that grant differential reproductive success where such traits can undergo genetic mutations
    7) Many Christians believe that the evil and suffering we see in the world today is because creation is broken which is itself the result of human rebellion against god – thus implying that there was a time in history where there wasn't such evil and suffering. In particular they believe human nature was corrupted by sin which explains why we hate, get angry, experience lust, get jealous etc. None of this seems consistent with what biologists believe about the evolution of human nature.

  2. atam mardes says:

    "Theistic Evolution", Bunch of sore creationist losers trying to save their indoctrinated religious beliefs. LOL

    No efficient mindful intelligent moral creator with the intentions of creating life, would create 100s of trillions of uninhabitable planets so that a planet earth (and possibly a few others) have life evolve on it by life-forms needing to kill each other for meat.

    Neither abiogenesis nor evolution needs God. The evil COVID19, influenza, malaria, etc., are DNA/RNA based. They can't be God's creation or naturally modified versions of it due to imperfections because by definition God is good and perfect. Since nature by itself has created the RNA/DNA for those viruses, then nature by itself is capable of creating life from non-life.

    Religion has got the fools by the balls. LOL

  3. Jared Nunez says:

    He says "chirological not chronological" and that kinda threw me off, only definition I can find of chirologcal is relating to palm reading?

  4. husq48 says:

    Don't many Orthodox Christians hold to TE?

  5. jonatopik says:

    Why do we assume a timeless God is bound by chronological order?

  6. Ray Winsor says:

    Remember that, though many leading scientists (i.e. "scriptural geologists") resisted the "old earth" ideas of James Hutton and Charles Lyell (Uniformitarianism) and defended scripture as both true and scientific, it was Christians, not evolutionary scientists, who first lead the charge against scripture, beginning in the 1800s when theologians (theistic evolutionists) readily adopted the "old earth" ideas, of Lyell (uniformitarianism) instead of Noah's Flood. The Bible believing scientists of the day were in a difficult position of trying to defend scripture when even theologians (who compromised the literal history of Genesis) were against them. The situation remains even worse today, despite recent scientific discoveries about the universe, atom, the internal structure and incredible complexity of cells, DNA, the natural world, etc. Believing scientists, though understandably still in a minority, are leaving Darwinian Evolution, recognizing that strictly natural processes, operating at random on inorganic chemicals, could never have produced complex living cells. Unfortunately, though they have grown weary of arguing how random mutations (essentially harmful to a living organism) in a highly complex genetic code provide improvements to it (no functional genetic information-increasing changes on which "goo to you" evolution depends). So, what do they do? They re-adopt Creation, but still hold on to the old earth and formulate a local Flood account to fit modern uniformitarian geology. How much better it would (and I believe employ better science) to come all the way back to a biblical worldview (instead of just a halfway or middle position between biblical creation and natural evolution (Theistic evolution)

  7. Lord Kizzle says:

    Theistic evolution makes sense if you stop thinking of it as darwinian evolution + God. The purpose is to try to explain the transitions in the fossil record and the DNA evidence and acknowledge they were not natural occurrences even though for now it's uncertain how exactly how they happened. Pretending the evidence of these transitions is weak or doesn't exist will get you nowhere. 
    It's conceivable that this could have happened quickly and with no death, just reproduction and variation. But in genesis it is suggested that all the animals were originally herbivores. That is evidence that animals have changed drastically since the fall as well.

  8. Account Void says:

    you cant have death before sin. death is a result of sin. while we cant know for certain how old the earth is we know its not billion of billion of years like evolutionist say. its very important to say evolutionist say because scientist agree with God and the bible, the only scientist that don't agree are the atheist scientist. I really enjoy hanks commentary and biblical knowledge. a goodpeice of advice for all biblical theologians, dont be afraid to say I dont know on issues where we simply do not know such as the age of the earth. some say its older some say its younger. makes more sense to say its younger

  9. Samari says:

    I ask that you Google Kent Hovind he will provide a more biblical answer to this question because this answer you have given this Christian is heresy

  10. joeforHistruth says:

    Not possible