Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Theistic evolution, what is it ?

Lewis

Member
Theistic evolution and evolutionary creationism are similar concepts that assert that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life.

Theistic evolution is not a theory in the scientific sense, but a particular view about how the science of evolution relates to religious belief and interpretation. Theistic evolution supporters can be seen as one of the groups who reject the conflict thesis regarding the relationship between religion and science – that is, they hold that religious teachings about creation and scientific theories of evolution need not contradict. In describing early proponents of this viewpoint, it is sometimes described as Christian Darwinism.

Terminology

The term was used by National Center for Science Education executive director Eugenie Scott to refer to the part of the overall spectrum of beliefs about creation and evolution holding the theological view that God creates through evolution. It covers a wide range of beliefs about the extent of any intervention by God, with some approaching deism in rejecting continued intervention. Others see intervention at critical intervals in history in a way consistent with scientific explanations of speciation, but with similarities to the ideas of Progressive Creationism that God created "kinds" of animals sequentially.
Acceptance

This view is generally accepted by major Christian churches, including the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Church and some mainline Protestant denominations; some Jewish denominations; and other religious groups that lack a literalist stance concerning some holy scriptures. Various biblical literalists have accepted or noted openness to this stance, including theologian B.B. Warfield and evangelist Billy Graham.

With this approach toward evolution, scriptural creation stories are typically interpreted as being allegorical in nature. Both Jews and Christians have considered the idea of the creation history as an allegory (instead of a historical description) long before the development of Darwin's theory. An example in Christianity would be the earlier writings by St. Augustine (4th century), though he later rejected allegory in favor of literal interpretation. By this Augustine meant that in Genesis 1 the terms "light", "day", and "morning" hold a spiritual, rather than physical, meaning, and that this spiritual morning is just as literal as physical morning. Augustine recognizes that the creation of a spiritual morning is as much a historical event as the creation of physical light. Three noted Jewish examples are that of the writings of Philo of Alexandria (1st century) Maimonides (12th century) and Gersonides (13th century).

Theistic evolutionists argue that it is inappropriate to use Genesis as a scientific text, since it was written in a pre-scientific age and originally intended for religious instruction; as such, seemingly chronological aspects of the creation accounts should be thought of in terms of a literary framework. Theistic evolutionists may believe that creation is not literally a week long process but a process beginning in the time of Genesis and continuing through all of time, including today. This view affirms that God created the world and was the primary causation of our being, while scientific changes such as evolution are part of "creatio continua" or continuing creation which is still occurring in the never ending process of creation. This is one possible way of interpreting biblical scriptures, such as Genesis, that seem to be in opposition to scientific theories, such as evolution.

The term evolutionary creationism refers to an understanding of God that transcends yet includes normal time and space, with nature having no existence independent of God. It allows interpretations consistent with both literal and poetic readings of Genesis and objective science.[

To learn much more go here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution
 
i think mr.barbarian fits that, but he will answer for sure. interesting i never knew that augustine recanted his earlier position.
 
This is scary.

Contemporary Christian denominations

Many Christian denominations support or accept theistic evolution. For example, on 12 February 2006, the 197th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth was commemorated by "Evolution Sunday" where the message that followers of Christ do not have to choose between biblical stories of creation and evolution was taught in classes and sermons at many Methodist, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Unitarian, Congregationalist, United Church of Christ, Baptist and community churches.[14]

Additionally, the National Council of Churches USA has issued a teaching resource to "assist people of faith who experience no conflict between science and their faith and who embrace science as one way of appreciating the beauty and complexity of God's creation." This resource cites the Episcopal Church, according to whom the stories of creation in Genesis "should not be understood as historical and scientific accounts of origins but as proclamations of basic theological truths about creation."[15]

The positions of particular denominations are discussed below.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution
 
I've had a long talk with some "Christians" about theisitc evolution, went on and on for a couple of weeks.

Bottom line:
theistic evolution, IN THE END, is a fancy term for another way to trip up ungrounded Christians.
To get them to start, basically, disbelieving the bible.

YEAH HATH GOD SAID?

Stay away from it. It's junk, and a big, fat, lie.
 
As a member of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS), I needed to chime in. In the 4th post, Lewis, you include Lutherans in the list of churches. In clicking on the wiki link, they made no differential either. It's important to note that there are different synods within the Lutheran church. The most liberal, and probably the ones that this link is referring to, is the Evangelical Lutheran Church Association (ELCA), which is very small compared to the LCMS. I've pasted something from lcms.org below, but I'll finish my thought here. As a church, we denounce theistic evolution. Personally I do as well.

I tried reading "Finding Darwin's God". The author is a Christian who is also a biological scientist. He uses this book to make the case for harmony between the two. I don't agree that they can be. I don't have a wealth of knowledge from the science perspective, so someone like Barbarian could chew me up and spit me out. I leave room that it might not have been a literal 6-day creation, and to that point Bronzesnake could do the same.

To set the record straight about Lutherans on this matter, this was the text pulled from their website:

Last action of convention affirms preaching, teaching creation

ST. LOUIS — In the final action before the close of the 62nd Regular Convention of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod July 15, delegates commended “preaching and teaching creation.â€

This is not the first time that the Synod has spoken on the matter. A 1971 document of its Commission on Theology and Church Relations affirms creation as God's work.

“The Scriptures teach that God is the creator of all that exists and is therefore the author and giver of life,†today's resolution states. “The hypotheses of macro, organic and Darwinian evolution, including theistic evolution, or any other model denying special, immediate and miraculous creation undercut this support for the honoring of life as a gift of God,†it continues.

The convention resolved that all Synod schools — from preschools to universities and seminaries — “continue to teach creation from the Biblical perspective,†that no school “tolerate any teaching that contradicts the teachings of divine creation,†that schools “properly distinguish between micro and macro evolution†and affirm the Scriptural teaching on creation, and that all pastors and teachers be reminded to “increase emphasis to the doctrine of God as the creator and author of life in thei preaching and teaching.â€
 
Lewis W said:
mjjcb, I was not trying to offend you.

No offense taken at all!!! Lewis, you're first class! :thumb

I was just pointing it out for general clarification to everyone reading the thread. I wouldn't want anyone to associate me or the LCMS with theistic evolution. It kills me that even within the Lutheran church, we have sub-denominations with such widely different doctrines. The ELCA is even involved in discussions about allowing homosexual pastors! I'm not sure if it was passed or not, but even having that conversation is mind-boggling. Oh, how I wish they would take another name and eliminate confusion with the Lutheran name. :shame

On the other extreme is the Wisconsin Lutheran Synod. They allow no women to lead in any capacity, separate the women and men on different sides of the church where they sit, and they don't allow members to commune with other denominations including other Lutherans. I invited a WLS family who moved into our neighborhood to join our in-home bible study, and the husband was mortified by the thought. Sorry to get off topic.

No theistic evolution for me!
 
I don't think it works wery well with Christianity.
We believe that for God humans are special beings, with souls. But according to evolution, even theistic, it just implies that humans are just smarter animals...? When does the soul come into play? And besides, secular evolutionists claim that with evolution God is not needed at all - so if it's the case why do even Christians have the need to reconcile God with evolution which apparently doesn't need him?
 
Luci said:
I don't think it works wery well with Christianity.
We believe that for God humans are special beings, with souls. But according to evolution, even theistic, it just implies that humans are just smarter animals...? When does the soul come into play? And besides, secular evolutionists claim that with evolution God is not needed at all - so if it's the case why do even Christians have the need to reconcile God with evolution which apparently doesn't need him?


We are animals, but that doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. We don't need to reconcile God with evolution unless you have bent your view of reality to accommodate a young earth.
 
It is obvious that many people need to believe in magic in order to maintain their faith in God. Personally I don't see it that way. God made the natural world work in predicable, understandable ways. The world is old, Demons don't lurk around every corner. Limbs don't regrow. No need to drink blood or eat human flesh. Female virginity has no magic powers.

I think it takes away from the works of Jesus to say he was supernatural, and relegate him to mythology like Santa, or Superman.
 
happyjoy said:
It is obvious that many people need to believe in magic in order to maintain their faith in God. Personally I don't see it that way. God made the natural world work in predicable, understandable ways. The world is old, Demons don't lurk around every corner. Limbs don't regrow. No need to drink blood or eat human flesh. Female virginity has no magic powers.

I think it takes away from the works of Jesus to say he was supernatural, and relegate him to mythology like Santa, or Superman.

Hi, happyjoy who "doesn't refute Christianity". Are you saying Jesus wasn't supernatural? That He was Natural? A typical man?

Miracles and the virgin birth are not "magic". Where do you reconcile any of this in the Bible? :shrug
 
mjjcb said:
happyjoy said:
It is obvious that many people need to believe in magic in order to maintain their faith in God. Personally I don't see it that way. God made the natural world work in predicable, understandable ways. The world is old, Demons don't lurk around every corner. Limbs don't regrow. No need to drink blood or eat human flesh. Female virginity has no magic powers.

I think it takes away from the works of Jesus to say he was supernatural, and relegate him to mythology like Santa, or Superman.

Hi, happyjoy who "doesn't refute Christianity". Are you saying Jesus wasn't supernatural? That He was Natural? A typical man?

Miracles and the virgin birth are not "magic". Where do you reconcile any of this in the Bible? :shrug


If you are saying that magic or supernatural stuff goes on then please show me some.
 
If you are saying that magic or supernatural stuff goes on then please show me some.

Virgin birth
Miracle healing
Jesus resurrection
The creation of the earth/heavens
God him self
talking burning bush
parting of a sea
fire tornadoes
calming of seas
etc etc


:study :readbible
 
John said:
If you are saying that magic or supernatural stuff goes on then please show me some.

Virgin birth
Miracle healing
Jesus resurrection
The creation of the earth/heavens
God him self
talking burning bush
parting of a sea
fire tornadoes
calming of seas
etc etc


:study :readbible

Show me some. I don't take the bible as literal so I don't believe the miracles of the bible are literal events. Show me some happening right now. No some Ropert Tilton clip, or that guy from Africa with their silly theatrics.

As for the Virgin birth that isn't impossible. There have been documented cases of virgins giving birth. A woman does not necessarily have to have intercourse to get pregnant.
 
John said:
Show me some. I don't take the bible as literal so I don't believe the miracles of the bible are literal events.

I think we are done here.


Meaning you can't show any reason to believe in magic.
 
I don't understand these views happyjoy... Why even believe in God if EVERYTHING in the world has a natural cause...? And if nothing of the biblical miracles, including Jesus' resurrection, ever happened? If that's the case why believe that there is something more besides the material world, that there is God who cares for us and that we have immortal souls? Without any belief in the "supernatural" we can as well be materialists and atheists.
 
Back
Top