Evolution and God can co-exist, I'm a deist and a biochemist, so I'm really into evolution. The modern evolutive theory at this point is a fact, there's no way to deny it we know microorganisms evolve because we have literally seen it and the evolution is animals is cristal clear, nothing stops God from being who guided evolution
If u r deist u cant say god has anything to do with our universe to guide our physical laws to ultimately have life on atleast one planet as we know. That makes u a theist
@@whydontyoustfudeism as defined in dictionary as ‘a supreme being who does not intervene with the universe’. Admittedly the question does arise if god doesn’t intervene with planet earth, what in the heck could he being doing to pass the time? I think it’s more plausible he does interact with the world but it’s in more subtle ways, making smaller miracles happen within our own lives.
Essentially, yes. That's what the Bible is all about. "By grace through faith are you saved" Personally, I believe that God created these things that we call science, and mankind simply put labels on it. Christians can believe in science, so long as you can connect the science back to God and the scripture.
@@MrDude-tp2pm You say: 'Christians can believe in science, so long as you can connect the science back to God and the scripture.' - Science or for that matter, this world doesn't work like that, mate. If science says the earth is round and has evidence, you can't go on saying the earth is flat because the scripture says so.
Evolution had no end goal. Life goes on and on. As long as there is life, it will pass on its genes. It will either adapt or die out with time and change. God's creation never ceases. It is always constant.
@@yungalucard9139Wrong. Evolution requires selection pressure and successful breeding within a particular niche in an environment. No intelligence nor designer required.
I can't help but laugh in disbelief at the untold amounts of videos espousing 6 day creation as fact!! Not only creating in 6 days, but filling it with flower and fauna in the process, and they want these fairy-tales to be on the National curriculum, and taught to our kids in schools?
I believe you have to look at the different Bible books as what type of genre they actually are. The Gospels are accounts, history books, the psalms are songs/ poems, Genesis and exodus are stories. I am a Christian that believes that Genesis never really happened, it is a story and stories have morals. God controls evolution.
Biologos is an organization founded by a Christian Nobel laureate geneticist specifically to help Christians understand and cope with the fact evolution. Francis collins was the first person in history to map the human genome.
Evolution disproves Christianity. According to Christianity, suffering in the world exists because humans disobeyed God in Garden of Eden. But evolution says that suffering existed long before humans existed.
You are always so humble, sir. Thank you. I have a couple of questions for you, if you have the time. 1. Do you mean believe that God created man through the evolutionary process involving apes? 2. Depending on how you answer this, please explain how you would teach the Genesis account to support your answer. Thank you. God bless.
If he doesn't answer you might check out his conversations with Josh Swamidass: On evolution - m.ua-cam.com/video/fLgaOGP2Bwo/v-deo.html And on the historical Adam - m.ua-cam.com/video/rQ3burs-mUo/v-deo.html
I know you're not asking me but I may have a decent answer from my view. 1) Evolved from a common ancestor is the correct way but yes, not humans. 2) Something can be 100% true (like the Bible is), without being accurate. The first 11 chapters are written very different and is likely a different author. I like Animal Farm as a good example. Its message is true and even historical because totalitarianism and communism has done it. But obviously the events never happened. Prophecy is weird sometimes. Look at Revelation, to my knowledge no Christian believes it is going to happen exactly how it's portrayed, yet is still 100% true. It also seems like if it were historical it would likely be in the historical books.
I appreciate that response. I am more concerned with the second and third order effects this stance implicates. For example, if you assert that evolution is true, you assert that the process takes millions of years to conduct. If you assert that the process took millions of years, then you are asserting that either the world was able to withstand the vast levels of reproduction of species, whether reptile, mammal, land or sea, or you assert that animals were dying off. If animals were dying off, then you assert that death came long before sin, which is contrary to Scripture, for the wages of sin is death. This stance also means you undermine God’s Word in Exodus 20:11, when he says he made heaven, earth, and everything in them in six days, and rested on the seventh. This is followed with the command for man to do the same. Evolution doesn’t work with that. Now you’re having to explain just exactly what God meant with that command and if all of the other commandments are reliable. Revelation is different because it is exactly that, an individual account of a vision, inspired by the Holy Spirit to be written by the breath of God (2 Timothy 3:16). I do understand what you are saying with Revelation though. Maybe it is an exact vision and maybe it isn’t. I’m sure people 2,000 years ago thought it impossible to have everyone in the world see the two witnesses killed. Today that is absolutely and easily feasible. Who is to say that the same effect doesn’t happen with the rest of Revelation? Thanks for the response!
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. - Acts 3:19 :) .
Nope. You confuse two completely different meanings of the term "to believe". Religious beliefs and believing something science found out are two completely different things. They work completely different. Using the same word for both things only adds confusion and blurs something that really should be kept separate.
@@nupsi6why? It’s obvious the skeletons of the dinosaur came from somewhere, or SOME THING. God created the world in 6 days, but for god a single day can be thousands upon millions of years.
@@yungalucard9139 What I pointed out has nothing to do with dinosaurs. It is a general phenomenon that many strict religious believers fail to understand the difference between the principles of religion and science. That they use the same words to describe completely different things they actually refer to. One example is "to believe", another one is the word "truth" which they use for something completely different than what the word _actually_ means. "To believe in 'god'" is something completely different that what he is trying to express with "I believe in evolution". The first one is a religious belief, so an unfounded, blind acceptance that contradicts many other things we trust in and rely on, the second one is a colloquial phrase expressing that we assume something is most likely correct since we understand the reasoning behind the statements and cannot see real contradictions to other knowledge or assumptions we have which is why we consider it correct until contrary evidence occurs. So the logical flow behind both concepts is inverse. And about your attempt to "reason" for 'god' having created dinosaurs: it is important that you understand to keep two things apart that _you_ apparently confuse: your conviction and actual knowledge. Both things are actually surprisingly separate and independent. The _claim_ that "God created the world in 6 days" is a recurring phrase hammered into people, but there is not a single real evidence for that being more than just that: a wild claim made up because it sounds good. To attempt to _reason_ from something that is completely made up does not make any sense. It only demonstrates that you prefer a religious delusion over actual observable reality. One can do that, sure. But it is choosing the cheap, the easy way, the way religion offers: nice sounding stories without much behind them but hot air. The type of special pleading acrobatics you perform here ("for god a single day can be thousands upon millions of years") demonstrates that you try to excuse the obvious contradictions in the claim by simply making up loop holes. Then you lean back satisfied and call that "makes sense". Although you actually just made up another completely unfounded _claim_ that again contradicts everything you assume elsewhere as base all of your decisions in life on. In a very successful manner: you _are_ in fact still alive! So you tell yourself made up stories that somehow sound nice to you, which you refuse to test or examine against your actual knowledge and observation because you know exactly that they would fail. Which you reject because then you would not be able to tell yourself that nice story any more. Which makes you so happy. In a way you act like a kindergarten child in that behavior.
The creation is an electromechanical set, only one known planet currently holds life. That life is a system of chemical reactions that crosses more than a quarter the time after the big bang. Life on earth was constantly matching toward human life, birds in the sky, beasts of the earth and trees. A Christian could simply state God created a path for life to move until his intention is fulfilled. The mind is capable of creating a lot of imaginative things. The problem is i want to know the truth! And there are too many possibilities when one looks at our history realistically
@@Notthatguy23 and before sailors reached the ‘new world’ of the Americas, by their limited view only the ‘old world’ held peoples and civilisation. Worldview changes over time with perspective. I’m not sure why you seem to think life has been marching towards humans, sounds like viewing humans as pinnacle, even the ultimate in what like on earth is, somehow more advanced than other creatures. But can you fly? Can you swim underwater? Can you survive for moths without food in the deep Antarctic? How many thousand of eggs can you lay?
There is a theory posited by Simon Conway Morris known as Process Structuralism. No matter how many times you turn back the clock of evolution, you’ll always have humans at the end
One thing to keep in mind is that certain parts of the bible were written allegorically instead of literally. There have been arguments that due to the way the original text was written, the creation story in genesis was not literal, but instead a poetic text ment to depict how humans came to be imperfect beings.
I think it is necessary for religious people to abandon this strict faith, in favor of a faith that adapts to modern knowledge. Evolution is proven with such certainty that denial of evolution is no longer an opinion, but a fallacy. Instead of denying facts, religion should follow it and adapt to it, as anything else will make it approach the status of fiction
So was the flat earth. I think you misunderstand what faith means. It doesn’t mean blindly trusting despite the evidence. It’s a trust in the Creator of the universe. It’s possible He used evolution in that process. I wouldn’t know, I wasn’t there. But your notion that someone of faith must by definition deny science is hogwash. God made science. It’s never going to contradict Him.
Kind is just a name given to it. Evolution is just 1 continuous process, never a big jump between kinds. We just see them as a big jump because the intermediate steps linking "kinds" are extinct.
I don’t think Darwin thought natural selection was unguided. In fact, he developed his theory based on the guided artificial selection of vegetables from flower buds. He basically came to the conclusion that if humans could provoke speciation in plants and animals like dogs then why can’t nature. Natural selection is guided by environmental conditions, so it’s hardly unguided.
@@yungalucard9139 there’s no evidence to suggest divine intervention in how nature works. I understand it seems like someone designed it, especially when we use words like “guided” or “selection.” Nature is the way it is because it can’t exist any other way. If we were on Mars then we would not see environments similar to the ones we see. All we mean by these terms “guided” and “selection” is that the environment we are in impacts how we live and adapt. For example, llamas and camels are closely related. They can mate and produce offspring. Camels live in deserts where they are less exposed to water, and thus we see them with humps that store water for them. Llamas don’t have this adaptation since it had access to more water. Since they were in different environments, they developed different traits to better fit into that environment. That’s how speciation happens. Hope that clears things up. Have a good day!
@@yungalucard9139If that’s what you need to tell yourself to keep believing in the fairytale. The story of Adam and Eve as well as the story of Noah is totally refuted by evolution. The bubble states the earth is roughly 6000 years old, we now know it’s billions of years old. Where are all the fossils from the massive amount of animals and humans that died in the great flood that Noah survived? We have evidence that proves the mass extinction of dinosaurs over 150 million years ago yet we can’t find any evidence for the great flood that happened 4000 years ago? Again, it’s all a fairytale that’s been beaten into your brain redundantly. I’m the Information Age, you ah have to choose ignorance and deliberately ignore the truth which is what you see in this comment sections.
@@yungalucard9139Wrong. That is an argument from personal incredulity. You are not justified in appealing to magic whenever you are faced with a mystery.
I think I am a theistic evolutionist, in the sense has we as living organisms must evolve to adapt in new environments. I also believe it was brilliantly planned by a creator. I think that is a heck of an argument for believers.
note for all, “kind” is not a scientific term, as there is no kind. we are all the same thing with extreme variation over time that when you look at one point far enough back it’s unrecognizable, there is no one point that you can say something is officially something else as it was always the same thing with extreme variation
You forgot to define "what we mean by a Christian". I'm an Atheist. I think you would be able to find many people who think of themselves as Christians but are quite happy to accept that their God has no part in directing evolution. What right do you have to tell them that they are not Christians ?
@@MrFossil367ab45gfythmaybe micro evolution. But macro evolution is biblical heresy plain and simple. Better go read your Bible again and start on page 1.
The Placebo effect works. We evolved to have that mysterious power of believing and having faith. Positive psychology says that spirituality is necessary for the betterment of an individual.
@@UN1VERS3S Faith might very make you happy but that wouldn't make it any more true. I would live a happier life if I believed I was God's gift to women.
@TurinTuramber Your OP basically says I trust the science! Others: remind you of science that proves prayer and belief matters to our mental and physical health You: superstitious mumbo jumbo! 😂
The first 5 words in the Bible state "In the beginning God created..." I'm not sure how one can be a Christian and think that God didn't create the world.
Christian here who has studied Thelogy and son of a Pastor. in short: Nobody was standing besides God and wrote down what he did, they gained Visions of what happened (a so called backwards Prophecy) and like with all Visions mentioned in the Bible they are filled with symbolism and Meaning in the original text. For the orignal Reader it was never meant to be taken 100% literally, the People back then did not think in those ways, they told Stories to imbue meaning and believe into People through those Stories. For us in our fact-focused Thinking we have to take everything literal what was written but it is pretty clear that this was not always the case and certainly not when the Bible (espacially the old testament) was written. For them the Meaning is the important Part, the Message transported. This is even part of the Hebrew Language used in the old Testament. It is a Language meant for Story Telling, not for detailed nuance. The Stories follow a certain Rythm and Structure, like Poems. Also personally I would say that God can create in more nuanced ways than just making millions of different species out of nothing. For me Evolution is just a way of describing how God works and creates anew over time. Certain passages in the Bible support this "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." - 2 Peter 3:8 For God our Limits of Thinking about how something can happen simply do not apply.
Evolution is true. That doesn't mean Christianity isn't. Jesus told many parables, an invented story told to illustrate a point. Jesus wasn't lying, he was teaching. Adam and Eve are the same.
Evolution is a scientific theory and that's debatable since it hasnt been observed. Science isnt a body of facts and therefore evolution, by definition, cannot be true.
@@IIrandhandleII No. Macro evolution has never been observed and nor is there any fossil evidence of a specie to specie transformation. The fossil record shows complete and fully functional organisms which can all be classified among today's species. A star forming vs the genetic transformation of a biological organism isnt a good analogy or comparison IMO.
The ironic thing about science is that you have to believe that truth exists, for science to have any utility. Unfortunately, you can't empirically prove that truth itself exists. It's a philosophical and theological concept.
Evolution as being unguided isn't a problem for belief in God. If evolution via natural selection is unguided, purposeless, etc. God can still be involved. God can direct a random process to form results. You can have both Darwin and God. God could've planned it out long ago, so all these natural processes can be traced back to his plan, unguided or not.
Really love that you can break down the different elements and explain the basics of each in such a short time. Really helps me to understand the range of theistic evolution explained in that way. Thanks!
Sorry, but you don't get to pick and choose which part of reality suits your imaginary fantasy world. Evolution is one of the most highly evidenced fields of study that there is. It is supported by many of the sciences, including: Biology Evolutionary biology Molecular biology Genetics Biogeography Geology Chemistry Anatomy Paleontology Archaeology Primatology Physics and also Mathematics And, btw, that list of fields refutes nearly all explanations of the natural world contained in the bible.
@@johnrap7203 You say that as if Christianity and evolution are mutually exclusive, but I don't think that has to be the case. Of course, if one takes a literal account of some of the stories in the bible I definitely agree it looks untenable. But that's not the only way to approach it.
@@Tpcool Yes, Christianity is incompatible with Evolutionary Theory. This video, and your point, demonstrate that very incompatibility. The video is rejecting a major aspect of evolution. In other words, it is not only shoehorning science into the religion, it is hacking off the inconvenient parts to make it fit. And your point is similar, in that you are retrofitting what your book says, to be more compatible with reality. Mankind has been forced to give up on many, many beliefs, from mere superstitions to full blown religions/cults, because of our better understanding of reality, especially us, and the natural world around us. No more Sun gods, no more Moon gods, forest gods, river gods, sea gods, war gods, thunder/lightening gods, mountain gods, etc ad nauseam.... It has been a couple thousand years. How are going on that list of what is literally true, and what is mythological, allegorical, metaphorical...fables...wives tales...rumour...
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. - Acts 3:19 :)
A kind is a animal of common lineage that has similar attributes. Like species, but species seems to be able to interbreed with other species, which is not the case for kinds. Kinds cannot interbreed with other kinds. That is the best I can understand it.
@@patientestantWrong. How would you explain ring species? Or how would you explain how female ligers can breed while all male ligers are always infertile?
I get such a hard time from other Christians sometimes for being all in on evolution. I finally came up with a quick few sentences that may help someone else. "Evolution is the mechanism that God uses. God created lighting but the mechanism is electricity. He always uses an ordered and observable mechanism to create. The Bible is infallible and true. Let me ask you something, is Animal Farm true? In my opinion the first 11ish chapters are written a bit different." Maybe something about how prophecy is often messy and confusing. If that doesn't work I say "I stopped doing drugs, am married and went to Bible college. My relationship with God is great now, leave me alone."
So, you believe in Evolution and also god performed medical surgery on Adam to extract a rib and changed the chromosome of the rib and created Eve. LOL
33:27 That is not to say that this supposed “murderer” would not have to answer for his sins. We have to give an account of our works to God himself. 2 Corinthians 5:10. So yes this man would receive eternal salvation, but his heavenly rewards would reflect his poor life choices.
The problem is even more basic. The question to ask is: how long has the universe existed? The answer to this depends on a single belief (non verifiable presupposition) and this single belief is whether or not the one way speed of light is the same as the two way speed of light. If the one way speed of light is the same as the two way speed of light then the evidence would suggest that the universe is old. However, since we cannot determine by any means available to us as to whether or not there is a difference between speed of light traveling one way and the speed of it returning the other way, the assumption that light travels at the same speed in both directions is just a convention. The simple thing is that it could well be that light has an infinite speed one direction and travels at c/2 in the opposite direct. This would do nothing to any current theory we use as we are only ever concerned with the average speed of the round trip. If this is the case then we can have NO knowledge on how old the universe is as what we see in the night sky could well be in real time. Almighty God (Father, SOn and Holy Spirit) does not have to do anything in accordance with our understanding of how things work as we do not understand how things work. He is more than sufficient to have brought the entire expanse of the universe into being at the same creative instant. Remember that "science" is not about the truth of anything but about trying to get a handle of understanding on the nature of the universe around us and as such at any time, all of our theories are subject to change as new data comes along. This change includes completely throwing out our current crop of theories and models.
@@drrydog If you believed in a [sky daddy] then you believed in something very small and finite and not in the Eternal Infinite Creator God(Father, Son and Holy Spirit). That's okay, you were only an ignorant child then, though you do appear to still be a very shallow thinker now by implication in your comment.
Wouldn’t the fact that the person is identifying themselves as a Christ follower and saying they believe in evolution already lead you to understand that they feel the creator is somehow involved in the act of creating regardless of process.
At surface level that's a good point, however it just comes down to undermining the Word of God. Look what that got Adam and Eve. Never a good idea. We have the genealogy going all the way back to Adam. Jesus claimed Adam and eve lived in "the beginning." Is Jesus your Lord or a liar? There's no neutral ground here. Blessings on your journey!
@@chelseabarker2250 I don’t see siding on the side of theistic evolution as undermining God. We humans have been given the ability to reason and use our God given creative brains to come up with theories and stories that explain the wonders of creation. In stark contrast of other Ancient Near East religions the Genesis poetry told by ancient Hebrews paints a beautiful picture of a god who partners with his creation instead of subjecting them to mere servants. That’s one of the many beautiful takeaways of that story. Then as we look a couple thousand years later we also hear another creation retelling take in the Gospel of John where the Word (not the Bible) defined as Jesus as being the instrument of all life. Interesting how John’s creative liberty moves beyond the material. To tell people you have to take things literal or else… is the reason people are prone to deconstruct. There’s no room for grace, humility, dare I say…mystery. If it’s not clear yet, I am on the side of letting people choose what ever creation narrative speaks to you. I don’t have to draw a hard line in this topic because it doesn’t really matter in my day to day action of loving people well. So I’ll join countless other followers of Jesus throughout time who understand that Jesus spoke in the context of his time to communicate greater truths than our human made theories of creation.
@@betoinbeta All of that sounds really tender and emotional and sweet and inclines me to agree with you. My short answer is we can find much common ground here because you are right that we need to keep our viewpoints and ourselves clothed in humility, and allow for all sorts of differing non-salvific beliefs within the body of Christ. So if you don't have time for the rest of this comment move along and save your sweet time. Continuing: We come from all tribes and tongues after all so of course I can expect much diversity in my brothers and sisters. But in a place here like America where we have not many excuses for ignorance when it comes to the Word of God, we should be among those who are the bastions for the Truth, and we must always speak the Truth in love. We tear down strongholds that raise themselves against the knowledge of God. It is a part of the Christian identity to do so, which is why Christians are so predictably hated among the world, including our Lord Himself. We are nearly always counter cultural. It doesn't honestly matter what stories men make up about creation even if they are beautiful, because truthfully we've been given the story from God Himself and don't need to reinvent the wheel. His story leaves plenty of room for mystery without having to go full on heretic. But I digress, it's not an issue of salvation so that's why I'm not going to keep berating you and try to get you to see it my way. In love of course, lol! Have a nice day thanks for the chat.
@@chelseabarker2250 First off thanks for the kind exchange. To state the obvious, I'm in no place trying to change anyone's mind about their interpretation, including yours. I love the diversity of thinking, I as you can surmise don't take the various scrolls in the Hebrew bible and the letters in the Christian bible as all being accurate literal history, much less scientifically accurate as I believe that they were written for a particular time, place and for a specific people (i.e. not 21st century white America). I always remind myself that the word of God is not this anthology of poems, legal documents, songs, letters, etc... it is Christ incarnate, full stop. Often Christians become so fully in love with the Bible that they treat it as a member of the trinity. The Bible is a merely a mechanism, a tool that points in the direction of life, that being The Christ. It was crafted by imperfect people as they all wrestled with the what the God mystery was, their stories, hopes and desires all cried out for a better way. To impose literalness to scripture specifically around the creation narrative I think dilutes the broader meaning and point. My hope is that people of faith be comfortable enough to have nuanced conversations about such things without calling each other out as heretics or note "real Christians" That form of dualistic mindset is religiosity at its worst. Now the last point, I promise LOL, is this idea that we must be "bastions of truth, tearing down things against the knowledge of God..." I urge caution to fellow travelers that have that type of tone. This does not seem like any of the "fruits of the Spirit" much less any of the beatitudes. I agree that we are counter cultural but, in the ways, outline in the Galatian passages and Christ's Sermon on the Mount. Which, when you look at it, is anti-empire and pro-marganlized. Christ was hated not simply because of his belief it was his tearing down of religious systems and political systems and social power dynamics that made him controversial not only to his people but to his disciples. This new kingdom where the weak were strong, where the outcast mattered, is what drove the early church's growth and what made politicians nervous. It was this faith in action that made followers of The Way stand out. Now, I'm first to admit that I have a long way to go when it comes to being that--radical of an example, that--open to the outcast, that--giving to my neighbor, that selfless to my enemy. The simple point I'm trying to illustrate is that it is not our job to be defenders of belief systems, we just need to love "recklessly" like it was done for us. (Getting off my soap box now) hope everyone else enjoyed the exchange. peace.
@@betoinbeta Hey this has been a great conversation and thank you too for sticking around to have it. Of course again, I mostly agree with you but wanted to clarify that first off when I say we tear down strongholds that raise themselves up against the knowledge of God - that is a Scripture: See 2 Corinthians 10:4-5. So I wouldn't caution people to use the same language that's in the Bible nor would I warn against doing what Paul said to do. And the Scriptures are the Word of God, and the Word is a Member of the Trinity so I would posit that we can't put too much emphasis on the Bible, although we definitely can put too much emphasis on our faulty interpretations and not enough on our own knowledge limitations. Also, I wouldn't say that someone who takes a naturalistic evolutionary viewpoint can't be a Christian, but I would challenge them on their view of God and His Word and how fully they trust it. I would do this out of love of course, because God's way is always for our best. I would highly encourage anyone reading this to go and see the exceptional video on here by answers in Genesis about what's coming in the church via Trojan horse. I don't want to post the link in case the comment gets taken down. But it was phenomenal and I would encourage my brothers and sisters to brush up on their history before it's censored away from you. Be wise in these dark times and watch out for the enemy's attacks for we are not ignorant to his devices with our one true weapon, our sword, the Word of God. Blessings on your journey! ❤️
While I think evolution in the traditional sense is wrong, I don't think believing in it nullifies our belief in Christ. I think it can become a problem though when you start delving into the nitty gritty bits of scripture and have to make exceptions and excuses for not believing it. At that point, many people go into it looking for ways to justify their worldview rather than let scripture speak for itself.
There’s no such thing as a “kind”. Evolution by natural selection is a fact of nature and the very backbone of science. Macro evolution and micro evolution are the same thing and there’s no defining factor between the two.
Darwin might be right that evolution is no more guided than the wind, but why would he say the wind is wholly unguided? The wind e.g. at pentecost was certainly guided.
A religious friend of mine told me he doesn't believe in evolution because it conflicts with his Christianity. Got it. If the facts don't support your preferred belief just ignore the evidence... what could possibly go wrong...?
@@bobskane4353 Exactly. Ignorance is bliss. But what happens when you are 80 years old and you had the same world view from when you were 12 years old? Youre basically an 80 year old baby, that believes in talking snakes and magical trees and the simple stories told in Sunday school Youre gonna die thinking like a 12 year old. I have friends and family members like this...
Evolutionary biologist here. Nothing, absolutely nothing. They’re both just evolution, at best maybe a timespan difference, but there’s no boundary of degree of change to mean that two such terms can be defined anymore than little evolution versus a bit more evolution.
Only problem with this is that all the different kinds of evolutions that you mention do not say everything happened in 7 days. No matter how you spin it, evolution and the bible are incompatible. Either the bible is right and evolution is wrong, or the bible is wrong and evolution is right. But these two do not spread the same message. You can't believe in both because they say different things
I put off watching this, fearing it would ruin my day with stupid arguments. Instead, I appreciate this sensible thesis. Can you be Cristian and believe in evolution? Technically yes, as long as you're still Christian. It's a tautology, but one that's worth pointing out, thanks!
@@historicalperspective I acknowledge that something could emerge which I wouldn't be able to distinguish from intelligence. Everything beyond that is a philosophical discussion I'm not motivated to get into. However, science acknowledges vice versa that a Godly creator might have created the universe and exists outside spacetime. Acknowledgement of possibility not a very useful argument in either direction
@@77dreimaldie0 that is entirely possible, considering that space and time are infinite it is totally possible that there are already beings who have ascended beyond space and time, and who either created us, guided our evolution, merely observe us, or don't even know that we exist at all.
Why are Christians defining which version of evolution they believe in? It is not up to Christianity to agree or disagree in how common ancestry works.
i don’t think they work together science and a book evolution is changing over time it is said that adam and eve looked like us today so they can’t be in the same reality
You’re right. Evolution is the opposite of Genesis as God says “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution says “Through death, man came into the world”. Both can’t be right and to believe in evolution is to think God isn’t telling the truth which can quickly lead to falling away from the faith like so many do in college.
Theistic evolution warned against by; Peter in 2 Peter 3:3-6 explicitly Paul in Galatians 1 a different gospel John in Revelation 22 adding to scripture.
If point 3 is true, God would have used evolution, which by definition means natural selection acting on random mutations. This is referred to as "theistic evolution". That doesn't seem to leave room for God directing the process. It would also impy that the Genesis account is not accurate. When Jesus quoted Genesis saying that God "created them from the beginning male and female", he implied that Adam and Eve were real individuals--a special creation.
I've asked a number of creationist friends to define the word "kind" as they use it in this debate. I'm looking for a rigid, defensible definition, one that can be expressed in simple trems. I have never yet received such a definition. Given that the concept of the "kind" is critical to the creationist account of origins, you'd think it would be easy to find such a definition, but so far, no luck.
@@metaldisciple Now please explain why knees and the back are so badly designed? Seems to me like it's a common issue when you go from a 4 legged animal to a two legged, GODDAMN IT MY KNEES HURT AGAIN! If we were designed then God is a b-word.
You good bruh? Regardless of what you believe it takes faith. Put your faith in Jesus. I choose to view the world through the Biblical worldview. No recently invented theories about ape-men for me.
I think the main take away here is all options can be believed in regardless of what it is, or if God is involved or not, because all of them cannot be 100% verified to be the truth, so in the they are ultimately all belief systems.
But it is something to point out that if you don’t believe in evolution then learning it’s a thing and stuff like a global flood never happened can be a slap in the face
Hi Sean Hope you see this. My question is do you believe death entered the world through Adam? If so then at least for man if not every other creature, did all gradual changes into man, I mean the almost man, almost dog, almost cat, almost …you get the picture. Did they all live together till death came and so we should have millions of transitional forms in the fossil record? I am not saying GOD couldn’t do it but I don’t think what we find demonstrates that HE did.
All of the atheists in the comments are acting like we have to ignore science to believe God Have y’all ever considered the possibility that God and science are perfectly compatible as in one can be compelled by the science the conclude there is a creator?
I’m an evolutionary biologist. When he said ‘evolution is a blind purposeless unguided process’, then he entirely gave a deliberate false view of evolution, which at core is a guided process, that very process being defined in Darwin’s own words as natural selection. So kindly, I’d suggest that’s a huge red flag on anything he says.
In order to continue believing in religion in the age of information you have to choose ignorance and do a lot of mental gymnastics. I used to know a Christian girl who was pretty devout but would admit the anti-LGBTQ rhetoric in Christianity is flaw. Religion is all or nothing. If you’re convinced an omniscient being wrote these books and you’re refuting some of it as nonsense then you are acknowledging that god isn’t all knowing. You’re admitting that you wiser than god.
No, it's the other way around. It depends on how much you feel you need to hang on to the literal text of your holy book whether your faith can accommodate the rational acceptance of a scientific explanation that happens to be irreconcilable with a literal interpretation of that text.
If a god exists why only use earth? The universe is likely hundreds of thousands of light years, it’s rather unambitious to not use more of space to create more life.
Well, it doesn't matter what the first ever fairytale book says, evolution is real and it has many proofs but the flying invisible guy in the sky doesn't have any proof. If you don't believe in evolution you can look up the proofs and get educated
Sean is clearly operating in good faith and his slicing and dicing of concepts is very sophisticated to the point that it gives the false impression of being true or correct, when it is demonstrably false. Although factually proven wrong in most of what he says here, I still admire his incessant attempts to reconcile all the factually incorrect statements in the bible with what we know for a fact to be true because of scientific confirmation by redefining terms and producing artificial categories and sub-categories that convey the appearance of true knowledge. Again, I respect him as he comes from a place of love and trying to be a good Christian, even if in doing so he ends up twisting like a pretzel in trying to make biblical knowledge look like actual facts.
Well…I’ve never heard a theory of an evolved species that crossed up somewhere in its history. And sorry if God truly exists, he’s already said that creatures have free will, and that would probably include their need to survive and evolve within their dna and ability change. So, either way, they changed the way they did without god guiding the process.
So how do you reconcile God saying “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution saying “Through death, man came into the world”? Both can’t be right.
Smh 😂 Why do ya always give something you dont have, credit for something you dont understand. I get the "because I dont understand then god" but dang.
If a theory is not believed, then it ceases to be a theory, correct? Every person who experiments and observed believes and changes their beliefs based on their understanding. Otherwise Darwin would never have described evolution. Darwin held beliefs that led him to describe evolution.
@@patientestant false. there is no element of belief required. a theory is measured on how well it fits the observed facts. theories on the topic are compared by how well they fit the observations and the one that does that best is considered the best theory.
@@Johnsmith-hp6tw and @billjohnson9472 If people don't believe in what they see, how can they build a theory for what they observed? There are many beliefs and assumptions to every experiment. If people don't believe a theory, they do not teach it, they don't perform experiments. We would literal not do anything if we did not believe in something.
@@Johnsmith-hp6tw the development of different species via evolution is a theory, not a fact. a really well supported theory, but theories do not "graduate" to facts.
Fr thanks I‘ve watched too many videos which were absolutely not with a neutral view. Of course I think I know what your opinion is but at least you don‘t let the other opinion look stupid
how can a christian being honest when in the same time they believe change across kinds is possible when the bible says animals will brought forth according to its kind?,do you guys believe fish kind produce cat kind?,none of these is biblical
the bible is not a science book. it is a library of stories and testimonies from the perspective of the writers. They were revolutionary, but God still calls us to discern and seek what we might see in this era of time, with the scientific and social knowledge available to us. God does not stop calling us to move closer with the knowledge available in every place and time.
@@staciewittenmyer1011 complete unbiblical nonsense made by someone who didnt genuinely want to know science but was just ashamed by biblical creation stories and avoid it,its said there multiple times from FIRST book of genesis to the gospel that adam is real and that This world is made in 6 days, evolution is not only unbiblical, its not gospel-like,cuz gospel luke shows genealogy of Jesus it shows adam as real person,adam is not a dumb ape,he speaks,he SPEAKS with God
You technically can still be a Christian and believe in evolution since we are saved by our faith in Jesus Christ work on the cross, but it’s a very slippery slope into apostasy. To believe in evolution is to not believe Genesis as God says “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution says “Through death, man came into the world”, both can’t be right. To believe in evolution is to believe God is not telling the truth which makes a believer constantly question the entire bibles authenticity. Evolution hinders our faith in God greatly and has caused the falling away of many believers. Let God be true and every man a liar!
If you have a theory you shouldn’t try to prove your theory but disprove it. And if your theory is fool-proof then you have effectively proven it. But since technically you cannot disprove (or prove) religion it should not even be worth the breath it takes to discuss and the time it takes to type.
If millions of things died before humans ever came around, then death didn't enter the world by sinful man. Evolution is biblical heresy plain and simple.
No, true death is spiritual death. God threw Adam and Eve out of the garden of eden so that they should not take from the tree of life and live forever. If they already would what is the point of saying that? But also you can believe that God created an existance without physical death thats outside this current universe scientific history with the fall causally prior to this universe, which would avoid the problem of animal suffering pre-fall. Most barriers the creationists set up is due to people subconciously thinking: Sure God is powerful, but he can't be That powerful.
@@MrMuruks I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Seems like jumping through a lot of philosophical hoops to avoid that evolution is simply not biblically sound. God is never portrayed in the Bible as a survival of the fittest type of God, so why would He set that into motion in order to create our world when He can simply speak anything into existence? It's simply not consistent with His character. Nor is it consistent as someone else pointed out here as far as everything producing after it's kind. When He created everything He called it good. Why would He need things to evolve for millions of years to finally be good? Way too many mental hoops have to be set up to jump through in order to make evolution work. It's not even scientific since we can't observe it, so why not just trust the Genesis creation account as God portrayed it as opposed to going off with some other kind of wildly worldly religious fantasy about the beginning of things. Much simpler and more biblically consistent.
Even if you understand Genesis 1 and 2 literalistically, nowhere does it say that plants or animals didnt die before humans. Do you really believe the blue whale, for example, was vegetarian rather than krill-eating?
Not really. You are thinking of YEC. Most Christians throughtout history have had no problem with the earth being older than 10000 years. Geological strata was only discovered in the 1600-1700s. By this time most Christians understood the earth to be millions if not billions of years old. When Darwin came up with his hypothesis and later theory, most Christians accepted it. By 1910s the only opposition Christians had against evolution was implication of Eugenics. Evolution by itself was accepted. Only the SDA taught a 6000 year old earth. The whole global flood and 6000 year old earth became popular in 1960s. Look up Joshua Moritz lectures on UA-cam.
@@michaelmalaki7176 I know exactly what I’m thinking of. Ken ham. Answers in genesis. All those questions are answered to a degree to be beyond plausible.
Neither the writings of Peter, Paul, Matthew, John, Jude, James, and the Words of Jesus himself, indicate that they believed in in milions of years of evolution. They ALL refered to the OT as writings being historical, and with historical persons. And Jesus refferred to Adam and Eve as historical persons. If we take the text seriously (Peter say" there is nothing in our writings more than you can read or understand ") evolution is out of the question.... Jon the theologian
Evolution and God can co-exist, I'm a deist and a biochemist, so I'm really into evolution. The modern evolutive theory at this point is a fact, there's no way to deny it we know microorganisms evolve because we have literally seen it and the evolution is animals is cristal clear, nothing stops God from being who guided evolution
If u r deist u cant say god has anything to do with our universe to guide our physical laws to ultimately have life on atleast one planet as we know. That makes u a theist
_The evolution in animals is crystal clear._
Yep. Just the other day I was down at the zoo and I saw all kinds of amazing evolution going on.
@@whydontyoustfu theists can still believe god interacts with his people though, deists like Thomas Jefferson tended to disagree otherwise.
@@yungalucard9139 deist can believe God interacts with not only the universe but specific sentient entity in the universe? I don't understand
@@whydontyoustfudeism as defined in dictionary as ‘a supreme being who does not intervene with the universe’. Admittedly the question does arise if god doesn’t intervene with planet earth, what in the heck could he being doing to pass the time? I think it’s more plausible he does interact with the world but it’s in more subtle ways, making smaller miracles happen within our own lives.
The short version: So long as evolution doesn't negate my blind faith, it's fine.
Essentially, yes. That's what the Bible is all about. "By grace through faith are you saved"
Personally, I believe that God created these things that we call science, and mankind simply put labels on it. Christians can believe in science, so long as you can connect the science back to God and the scripture.
@@MrDude-tp2pm Easier response would be : In fairy tales, don't ask questions.
@@JD-ro7xe you believe what you want, my friend.
@@MrDude-tp2pm
😊 Certainly, my friend.
@@MrDude-tp2pm You say: 'Christians can believe in science, so long as you can connect the science back to God and the scripture.'
- Science or for that matter, this world doesn't work like that, mate. If science says the earth is round and has evidence, you can't go on saying the earth is flat because the scripture says so.
Evolutionary mechanisms may appear to be purposelessness to us but that doesnt mean they are. The end result speaks for itself.
There is no "end result"
Where did u learn evolution
Evolution of any kind requires intelligent design. If nature is like an algorithm, who created the coding? It’s pretty obvious who to me.
Evolution had no end goal. Life goes on and on. As long as there is life, it will pass on its genes. It will either adapt or die out with time and change.
God's creation never ceases. It is always constant.
There is no end result nor intention to evolution. As long as a species continues to reproduce and thrive, evolution will occur.
@@yungalucard9139Wrong. Evolution requires selection pressure and successful breeding within a particular niche in an environment.
No intelligence nor designer required.
I'm not particularly religious, but if I was I would still adhere to evolution, and it being part of God's plan.
Evolution refuted the story of Adam and Eve and the story of Noah and the global flood. It’s all a fairytale and it’s so obvious.
That is The most common Christian belief on the subject
@@jin4712and wrong one.
I can't help but laugh in disbelief at the untold amounts of videos espousing 6 day creation as fact!! Not only creating in 6 days, but filling it with flower and fauna in the process, and they want these fairy-tales to be on the National curriculum, and taught to our kids in schools?
@@PortmanRd not literally 6 days. Most of Genesis is allegorical
I mean wasn’t the bible written in a way for man to understand. So what if adam being created from first was just simplified evolution done by god?
I believe you have to look at the different Bible books as what type of genre they actually are. The Gospels are accounts, history books, the psalms are songs/ poems, Genesis and exodus are stories. I am a Christian that believes that Genesis never really happened, it is a story and stories have morals. God controls evolution.
Biologos is an organization founded by a Christian Nobel laureate geneticist specifically to help Christians understand and cope with the fact evolution.
Francis collins was the first person in history to map the human genome.
Evolution disproves Christianity. According to Christianity, suffering in the world exists because humans disobeyed God in Garden of Eden. But evolution says that suffering existed long before humans existed.
You are always so humble, sir. Thank you.
I have a couple of questions for you, if you have the time.
1. Do you mean believe that God created man through the evolutionary process involving apes?
2. Depending on how you answer this, please explain how you would teach the Genesis account to support your answer.
Thank you. God bless.
hope he does answer.
^evolution didn’t happen through apes. Apes and humans supposedly had a common ancestor
If he doesn't answer you might check out his conversations with Josh Swamidass:
On evolution - m.ua-cam.com/video/fLgaOGP2Bwo/v-deo.html
And on the historical Adam - m.ua-cam.com/video/rQ3burs-mUo/v-deo.html
I know you're not asking me but I may have a decent answer from my view.
1) Evolved from a common ancestor is the correct way but yes, not humans.
2) Something can be 100% true (like the Bible is), without being accurate. The first 11 chapters are written very different and is likely a different author. I like Animal Farm as a good example. Its message is true and even historical because totalitarianism and communism has done it. But obviously the events never happened. Prophecy is weird sometimes. Look at Revelation, to my knowledge no Christian believes it is going to happen exactly how it's portrayed, yet is still 100% true. It also seems like if it were historical it would likely be in the historical books.
I appreciate that response. I am more concerned with the second and third order effects this stance implicates.
For example, if you assert that evolution is true, you assert that the process takes millions of years to conduct. If you assert that the process took millions of years, then you are asserting that either the world was able to withstand the vast levels of reproduction of species, whether reptile, mammal, land or sea, or you assert that animals were dying off.
If animals were dying off, then you assert that death came long before sin, which is contrary to Scripture, for the wages of sin is death.
This stance also means you undermine God’s Word in Exodus 20:11, when he says he made heaven, earth, and everything in them in six days, and rested on the seventh. This is followed with the command for man to do the same. Evolution doesn’t work with that. Now you’re having to explain just exactly what God meant with that command and if all of the other commandments are reliable.
Revelation is different because it is exactly that, an individual account of a vision, inspired by the Holy Spirit to be written by the breath of God (2 Timothy 3:16). I do understand what you are saying with Revelation though. Maybe it is an exact vision and maybe it isn’t. I’m sure people 2,000 years ago thought it impossible to have everyone in the world see the two witnesses killed. Today that is absolutely and easily feasible. Who is to say that the same effect doesn’t happen with the rest of Revelation?
Thanks for the response!
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
- Acts 3:19
:)
.
I am a Christian but I believe in evolution and god
Nope.
You confuse two completely different meanings of the term "to believe".
Religious beliefs and believing something science found out are two completely different things. They work completely different. Using the same word for both things only adds confusion and blurs something that really should be kept separate.
There is evidence for evolution, no evidence for God
@@nupsi6why? It’s obvious the skeletons of the dinosaur came from somewhere, or SOME THING. God created the world in 6 days, but for god a single day can be thousands upon millions of years.
@@yungalucard9139 What I pointed out has nothing to do with dinosaurs. It is a general phenomenon that many strict religious believers fail to understand the difference between the principles of religion and science. That they use the same words to describe completely different things they actually refer to. One example is "to believe", another one is the word "truth" which they use for something completely different than what the word _actually_ means.
"To believe in 'god'" is something completely different that what he is trying to express with "I believe in evolution". The first one is a religious belief, so an unfounded, blind acceptance that contradicts many other things we trust in and rely on, the second one is a colloquial phrase expressing that we assume something is most likely correct since we understand the reasoning behind the statements and cannot see real contradictions to other knowledge or assumptions we have which is why we consider it correct until contrary evidence occurs. So the logical flow behind both concepts is inverse.
And about your attempt to "reason" for 'god' having created dinosaurs: it is important that you understand to keep two things apart that _you_ apparently confuse: your conviction and actual knowledge. Both things are actually surprisingly separate and independent. The _claim_ that "God created the world in 6 days" is a recurring phrase hammered into people, but there is not a single real evidence for that being more than just that: a wild claim made up because it sounds good. To attempt to _reason_ from something that is completely made up does not make any sense. It only demonstrates that you prefer a religious delusion over actual observable reality. One can do that, sure. But it is choosing the cheap, the easy way, the way religion offers: nice sounding stories without much behind them but hot air.
The type of special pleading acrobatics you perform here ("for god a single day can be thousands upon millions of years") demonstrates that you try to excuse the obvious contradictions in the claim by simply making up loop holes. Then you lean back satisfied and call that "makes sense". Although you actually just made up another completely unfounded _claim_ that again contradicts everything you assume elsewhere as base all of your decisions in life on. In a very successful manner: you _are_ in fact still alive!
So you tell yourself made up stories that somehow sound nice to you, which you refuse to test or examine against your actual knowledge and observation because you know exactly that they would fail. Which you reject because then you would not be able to tell yourself that nice story any more. Which makes you so happy.
In a way you act like a kindergarten child in that behavior.
Short answer, yes.
I’ve been doing this for about 3 years.
The creation is an electromechanical set, only one known planet currently holds life. That life is a system of chemical reactions that crosses more than a quarter the time after the big bang. Life on earth was constantly matching toward human life, birds in the sky, beasts of the earth and trees. A Christian could simply state God created a path for life to move until his intention is fulfilled. The mind is capable of creating a lot of imaginative things. The problem is i want to know the truth! And there are too many possibilities when one looks at our history realistically
@@Notthatguy23 and before sailors reached the ‘new world’ of the Americas, by their limited view only the ‘old world’ held peoples and civilisation. Worldview changes over time with perspective. I’m not sure why you seem to think life has been marching towards humans, sounds like viewing humans as pinnacle, even the ultimate in what like on earth is, somehow more advanced than other creatures. But can you fly? Can you swim underwater? Can you survive for moths without food in the deep Antarctic? How many thousand of eggs can you lay?
There is a theory posited by Simon Conway Morris known as Process Structuralism. No matter how many times you turn back the clock of evolution, you’ll always have humans at the end
What a nonsense.
@@nupsi6 what part? It’s a well reputed theory in the scientific department. Definitely gives neoDarwinian theories a run for their money
Yep, the Bible is clear, revelation will be judgement upon man
@@nupsi6 being skeptical about everything and anything to the max is not being smart
@@ChevySamk Why do you assume I am? I did not write _anything_ along those lines.
The glaring problem with "theistic evolution" is that the book of Genesis completely contradicts it.
Amen someone else with rationality left here Thank goodness
One thing to keep in mind is that certain parts of the bible were written allegorically instead of literally.
There have been arguments that due to the way the original text was written, the creation story in genesis was not literal, but instead a poetic text ment to depict how humans came to be imperfect beings.
I think it is necessary for religious people to abandon this strict faith, in favor of a faith that adapts to modern knowledge. Evolution is proven with such certainty that denial of evolution is no longer an opinion, but a fallacy. Instead of denying facts, religion should follow it and adapt to it, as anything else will make it approach the status of fiction
Well if that’s the case, then at the rate of our technological and scientific progression, religion won’t exist in a couple centuries
So was the flat earth. I think you misunderstand what faith means. It doesn’t mean blindly trusting despite the evidence. It’s a trust in the Creator of the universe. It’s possible He used evolution in that process. I wouldn’t know, I wasn’t there. But your notion that someone of faith must by definition deny science is hogwash. God made science. It’s never going to contradict Him.
If you allegorize Genesis 1:1 then you can Allegorize John 3:16
You're to allegorize only where you're supposed to
bad equivalence, a lot of the bible is both literal and metaphorical
Unless you want to say Jesus' parables were literal and that Pdalms are literal
Thanks man I’ve been really confused what I should or not thank you so much man
Kind is just a name given to it. Evolution is just 1 continuous process, never a big jump between kinds. We just see them as a big jump because the intermediate steps linking "kinds" are extinct.
I don’t think Darwin thought natural selection was unguided. In fact, he developed his theory based on the guided artificial selection of vegetables from flower buds. He basically came to the conclusion that if humans could provoke speciation in plants and animals like dogs then why can’t nature. Natural selection is guided by environmental conditions, so it’s hardly unguided.
This is a Fact. Science worshippers, far left, militant atheists all portray Darwin's ideas for their own agenda.
Darwin is even a christian.
But who created the process for how nature work? These laws don’t just come from no where, it takes a divine entity to construct them.
@@yungalucard9139 there’s no evidence to suggest divine intervention in how nature works. I understand it seems like someone designed it, especially when we use words like “guided” or “selection.” Nature is the way it is because it can’t exist any other way. If we were on Mars then we would not see environments similar to the ones we see. All we mean by these terms “guided” and “selection” is that the environment we are in impacts how we live and adapt. For example, llamas and camels are closely related. They can mate and produce offspring. Camels live in deserts where they are less exposed to water, and thus we see them with humps that store water for them. Llamas don’t have this adaptation since it had access to more water. Since they were in different environments, they developed different traits to better fit into that environment. That’s how speciation happens.
Hope that clears things up. Have a good day!
@@yungalucard9139If that’s what you need to tell yourself to keep believing in the fairytale. The story of Adam and Eve as well as the story of Noah is totally refuted by evolution. The bubble states the earth is roughly 6000 years old, we now know it’s billions of years old. Where are all the fossils from the massive amount of animals and humans that died in the great flood that Noah survived? We have evidence that proves the mass extinction of dinosaurs over 150 million years ago yet we can’t find any evidence for the great flood that happened 4000 years ago? Again, it’s all a fairytale that’s been beaten into your brain redundantly. I’m the Information Age, you ah have to choose ignorance and deliberately ignore the truth which is what you see in this comment sections.
@@yungalucard9139Wrong. That is an argument from personal incredulity. You are not justified in appealing to magic whenever you are faced with a mystery.
I think I am a theistic evolutionist, in the sense has we as living organisms must evolve to adapt in new environments. I also believe it was brilliantly planned by a creator. I think that is a heck of an argument for believers.
note for all, “kind” is not a scientific term, as there is no kind. we are all the same thing with extreme variation over time that when you look at one point far enough back it’s unrecognizable, there is no one point that you can say something is officially something else as it was always the same thing with extreme variation
You forgot to define "what we mean by a Christian". I'm an Atheist. I think you would be able to find many people who think of themselves as Christians but are quite happy to accept that their God has no part in directing evolution. What right do you have to tell them that they are not Christians ?
I'm Catholic and I see evolution via natural selection to be the way and method God used to bring about diversity and life. Evolution is a FACT.
@@MrFossil367ab45gfythmaybe micro evolution. But macro evolution is biblical heresy plain and simple. Better go read your Bible again and start on page 1.
Unlike superstitious nonsense, evolutionary theory works whether you would accept it or not.
The Placebo effect works.
We evolved to have that mysterious power of believing and having faith.
Positive psychology says that spirituality is necessary for the betterment of an individual.
@@UN1VERS3S Faith might very make you happy but that wouldn't make it any more true. I would live a happier life if I believed I was God's gift to women.
@@TurinTuramberbullshit
And vice versa
@TurinTuramber Your OP basically says I trust the science!
Others: remind you of science that proves prayer and belief matters to our mental and physical health
You: superstitious mumbo jumbo!
😂
The first 5 words in the Bible state "In the beginning God created..." I'm not sure how one can be a Christian and think that God didn't create the world.
Christian here who has studied Thelogy and son of a Pastor.
in short: Nobody was standing besides God and wrote down what he did, they gained Visions of what happened (a so called backwards Prophecy) and like with all Visions mentioned in the Bible they are filled with symbolism and Meaning in the original text. For the orignal Reader it was never meant to be taken 100% literally, the People back then did not think in those ways, they told Stories to imbue meaning and believe into People through those Stories.
For us in our fact-focused Thinking we have to take everything literal what was written but it is pretty clear that this was not always the case and certainly not when the Bible (espacially the old testament) was written. For them the Meaning is the important Part, the Message transported. This is even part of the Hebrew Language used in the old Testament. It is a Language meant for Story Telling, not for detailed nuance. The Stories follow a certain Rythm and Structure, like Poems.
Also personally I would say that God can create in more nuanced ways than just making millions of different species out of nothing. For me Evolution is just a way of describing how God works and creates anew over time.
Certain passages in the Bible support this "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." - 2 Peter 3:8
For God our Limits of Thinking about how something can happen simply do not apply.
@@shineshadow Very well said.
It's not a question of 'if' God created but 'how'.
Evolution is not about the origin of the universe.
@@shineshadow visions 😂😅. Thats so ranven. Its the future/past I can see. Thats so Raven😂.
So superpowers did excist.
Evolution is true. That doesn't mean Christianity isn't.
Jesus told many parables, an invented story told to illustrate a point. Jesus wasn't lying, he was teaching. Adam and Eve are the same.
Evolution is a scientific theory and that's debatable since it hasnt been observed. Science isnt a body of facts and therefore evolution, by definition, cannot be true.
@@MarkNOTW evolution is observed every day.. have you seen a star form? No.. do you see evidence of stars forming? Yes... same principle.
@@IIrandhandleII No. Macro evolution has never been observed and nor is there any fossil evidence of a specie to specie transformation. The fossil record shows complete and fully functional organisms which can all be classified among today's species. A star forming vs the genetic transformation of a biological organism isnt a good analogy or comparison IMO.
The amazing thing about science is that you don’t need to believe in things for them to be true. They simply are true or they're not.
The ironic thing about science is that you have to believe that truth exists, for science to have any utility. Unfortunately, you can't empirically prove that truth itself exists. It's a philosophical and theological concept.
Christians can pick and choose what parts of their mythology and what parts of science they believe. Some can even do this when the contradict.
Lemme guess, God of the gaps fallacy? Not everything is exclusively science or god
Evolution as being unguided isn't a problem for belief in God. If evolution via natural selection is unguided, purposeless, etc. God can still be involved. God can direct a random process to form results. You can have both Darwin and God. God could've planned it out long ago, so all these natural processes can be traced back to his plan, unguided or not.
Really love that you can break down the different elements and explain the basics of each in such a short time. Really helps me to understand the range of theistic evolution explained in that way. Thanks!
Sorry, but you don't get to pick and choose which part of reality suits your imaginary fantasy world.
Evolution is one of the most highly evidenced fields of study that there is.
It is supported by many of the sciences, including:
Biology
Evolutionary biology
Molecular biology
Genetics
Biogeography
Geology
Chemistry
Anatomy
Paleontology
Archaeology
Primatology
Physics
and also Mathematics
And, btw, that list of fields refutes nearly all explanations of the natural world contained in the bible.
@@johnrap7203 You say that as if Christianity and evolution are mutually exclusive, but I don't think that has to be the case. Of course, if one takes a literal account of some of the stories in the bible I definitely agree it looks untenable. But that's not the only way to approach it.
@@Tpcool Yes, Christianity is incompatible with Evolutionary Theory.
This video, and your point, demonstrate that very incompatibility.
The video is rejecting a major aspect of evolution. In other words, it is not only shoehorning science into the religion, it is hacking off the inconvenient parts to make it fit.
And your point is similar, in that you are retrofitting what your book says, to be more compatible with reality.
Mankind has been forced to give up on many, many beliefs, from mere superstitions to full blown religions/cults, because of our better understanding of reality, especially us, and the natural world around us.
No more Sun gods, no more Moon gods, forest gods, river gods, sea gods, war gods, thunder/lightening gods, mountain gods, etc ad nauseam....
It has been a couple thousand years. How are going on that list of what is literally true, and what is mythological, allegorical, metaphorical...fables...wives tales...rumour...
And you will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. -Jeremiah 29:13
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. -John 3:16
Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out.
- Acts 3:19
:)
@@johnrap7203☕️
wtf is "kind" means nothing in science.
A kind is a animal of common lineage that has similar attributes. Like species, but species seems to be able to interbreed with other species, which is not the case for kinds. Kinds cannot interbreed with other kinds. That is the best I can understand it.
@@patientestant kind has no scientific value. It makes you look stupid
@@patientestantWrong. How would you explain ring species?
Or how would you explain how female ligers can breed while all male ligers are always infertile?
What do you think it means? Different kinds of animals. Monkeys becoming humans. That sort of thing.
@@desertrose0601 has no meaning in science...
You're thinking of species
I get such a hard time from other Christians sometimes for being all in on evolution. I finally came up with a quick few sentences that may help someone else. "Evolution is the mechanism that God uses. God created lighting but the mechanism is electricity. He always uses an ordered and observable mechanism to create. The Bible is infallible and true. Let me ask you something, is Animal Farm true? In my opinion the first 11ish chapters are written a bit different." Maybe something about how prophecy is often messy and confusing.
If that doesn't work I say "I stopped doing drugs, am married and went to Bible college. My relationship with God is great now, leave me alone."
So, you believe in Evolution and also god performed medical surgery on Adam to extract a rib and changed the chromosome of the rib and created Eve. LOL
@@sanjeevgig8918 that's what human do but for God he can just "doooo" you know.
33:27 That is not to say that this supposed “murderer” would not have to answer for his sins. We have to give an account of our works to God himself. 2 Corinthians 5:10. So yes this man would receive eternal salvation, but his heavenly rewards would reflect his poor life choices.
There’s always a purpose to evolution. Darwin didn’t mean that it was random. He meant god didn’t interfere with the process.
God may not interfere with nature but he certainly interferes with us his creations.
I think that way, too. I believe God designed the process to be such that it will go on its own so he doesn't have to tinker around.
Whatever any human being says , God was already their
The problem is even more basic. The question to ask is: how long has the universe existed? The answer to this depends on a single belief (non verifiable presupposition) and this single belief is whether or not the one way speed of light is the same as the two way speed of light.
If the one way speed of light is the same as the two way speed of light then the evidence would suggest that the universe is old.
However, since we cannot determine by any means available to us as to whether or not there is a difference between speed of light traveling one way and the speed of it returning the other way, the assumption that light travels at the same speed in both directions is just a convention.
The simple thing is that it could well be that light has an infinite speed one direction and travels at c/2 in the opposite direct. This would do nothing to any current theory we use as we are only ever concerned with the average speed of the round trip. If this is the case then we can have NO knowledge on how old the universe is as what we see in the night sky could well be in real time.
Almighty God (Father, SOn and Holy Spirit) does not have to do anything in accordance with our understanding of how things work as we do not understand how things work. He is more than sufficient to have brought the entire expanse of the universe into being at the same creative instant.
Remember that "science" is not about the truth of anything but about trying to get a handle of understanding on the nature of the universe around us and as such at any time, all of our theories are subject to change as new data comes along. This change includes completely throwing out our current crop of theories and models.
I remember when I believed in the sky daddy. then I turned 8
@@drrydog If you believed in a [sky daddy] then you believed in something very small and finite and not in the Eternal Infinite Creator God(Father, Son and Holy Spirit). That's okay, you were only an ignorant child then, though you do appear to still be a very shallow thinker now by implication in your comment.
Wouldn’t the fact that the person is identifying themselves as a Christ follower and saying they believe in evolution already lead you to understand that they feel the creator is somehow involved in the act of creating regardless of process.
At surface level that's a good point, however it just comes down to undermining the Word of God. Look what that got Adam and Eve. Never a good idea. We have the genealogy going all the way back to Adam. Jesus claimed Adam and eve lived in "the beginning." Is Jesus your Lord or a liar? There's no neutral ground here. Blessings on your journey!
@@chelseabarker2250 I don’t see siding on the side of theistic evolution as undermining God. We humans have been given the ability to reason and use our God given creative brains to come up with theories and stories that explain the wonders of creation. In stark contrast of other Ancient Near East religions the Genesis poetry told by ancient Hebrews paints a beautiful picture of a god who partners with his creation instead of subjecting them to mere servants. That’s one of the many beautiful takeaways of that story. Then as we look a couple thousand years later we also hear another creation retelling take in the Gospel of John where the Word (not the Bible) defined as Jesus as being the instrument of all life. Interesting how John’s creative liberty moves beyond the material. To tell people you have to take things literal or else… is the reason people are prone to deconstruct. There’s no room for grace, humility, dare I say…mystery. If it’s not clear yet, I am on the side of letting people choose what ever creation narrative speaks to you. I don’t have to draw a hard line in this topic because it doesn’t really matter in my day to day action of loving people well. So I’ll join countless other followers of Jesus throughout time who understand that Jesus spoke in the context of his time to communicate greater truths than our human made theories of creation.
@@betoinbeta All of that sounds really tender and emotional and sweet and inclines me to agree with you. My short answer is we can find much common ground here because you are right that we need to keep our viewpoints and ourselves clothed in humility, and allow for all sorts of differing non-salvific beliefs within the body of Christ. So if you don't have time for the rest of this comment move along and save your sweet time.
Continuing: We come from all tribes and tongues after all so of course I can expect much diversity in my brothers and sisters. But in a place here like America where we have not many excuses for ignorance when it comes to the Word of God, we should be among those who are the bastions for the Truth, and we must always speak the Truth in love. We tear down strongholds that raise themselves against the knowledge of God. It is a part of the Christian identity to do so, which is why Christians are so predictably hated among the world, including our Lord Himself. We are nearly always counter cultural. It doesn't honestly matter what stories men make up about creation even if they are beautiful, because truthfully we've been given the story from God Himself and don't need to reinvent the wheel. His story leaves plenty of room for mystery without having to go full on heretic. But I digress, it's not an issue of salvation so that's why I'm not going to keep berating you and try to get you to see it my way. In love of course, lol! Have a nice day thanks for the chat.
@@chelseabarker2250 First off thanks for the kind exchange. To state the obvious, I'm in no place trying to change anyone's mind about their interpretation, including yours. I love the diversity of thinking, I as you can surmise don't take the various scrolls in the Hebrew bible and the letters in the Christian bible as all being accurate literal history, much less scientifically accurate as I believe that they were written for a particular time, place and for a specific people (i.e. not 21st century white America). I always remind myself that the word of God is not this anthology of poems, legal documents, songs, letters, etc... it is Christ incarnate, full stop. Often Christians become so fully in love with the Bible that they treat it as a member of the trinity. The Bible is a merely a mechanism, a tool that points in the direction of life, that being The Christ. It was crafted by imperfect people as they all wrestled with the what the God mystery was, their stories, hopes and desires all cried out for a better way. To impose literalness to scripture specifically around the creation narrative I think dilutes the broader meaning and point. My hope is that people of faith be comfortable enough to have nuanced conversations about such things without calling each other out as heretics or note "real Christians" That form of dualistic mindset is religiosity at its worst. Now the last point, I promise LOL, is this idea that we must be "bastions of truth, tearing down things against the knowledge of God..." I urge caution to fellow travelers that have that type of tone. This does not seem like any of the "fruits of the Spirit" much less any of the beatitudes. I agree that we are counter cultural but, in the ways, outline in the Galatian passages and Christ's Sermon on the Mount. Which, when you look at it, is anti-empire and pro-marganlized. Christ was hated not simply because of his belief it was his tearing down of religious systems and political systems and social power dynamics that made him controversial not only to his people but to his disciples. This new kingdom where the weak were strong, where the outcast mattered, is what drove the early church's growth and what made politicians nervous. It was this faith in action that made followers of The Way stand out. Now, I'm first to admit that I have a long way to go when it comes to being that--radical of an example, that--open to the outcast, that--giving to my neighbor, that selfless to my enemy. The simple point I'm trying to illustrate is that it is not our job to be defenders of belief systems, we just need to love "recklessly" like it was done for us. (Getting off my soap box now) hope everyone else enjoyed the exchange. peace.
@@betoinbeta Hey this has been a great conversation and thank you too for sticking around to have it. Of course again, I mostly agree with you but wanted to clarify that first off when I say we tear down strongholds that raise themselves up against the knowledge of God - that is a Scripture: See 2 Corinthians 10:4-5. So I wouldn't caution people to use the same language that's in the Bible nor would I warn against doing what Paul said to do. And the Scriptures are the Word of God, and the Word is a Member of the Trinity so I would posit that we can't put too much emphasis on the Bible, although we definitely can put too much emphasis on our faulty interpretations and not enough on our own knowledge limitations. Also, I wouldn't say that someone who takes a naturalistic evolutionary viewpoint can't be a Christian, but I would challenge them on their view of God and His Word and how fully they trust it. I would do this out of love of course, because God's way is always for our best. I would highly encourage anyone reading this to go and see the exceptional video on here by answers in Genesis about what's coming in the church via Trojan horse. I don't want to post the link in case the comment gets taken down. But it was phenomenal and I would encourage my brothers and sisters to brush up on their history before it's censored away from you. Be wise in these dark times and watch out for the enemy's attacks for we are not ignorant to his devices with our one true weapon, our sword, the Word of God. Blessings on your journey! ❤️
While I think evolution in the traditional sense is wrong, I don't think believing in it nullifies our belief in Christ. I think it can become a problem though when you start delving into the nitty gritty bits of scripture and have to make exceptions and excuses for not believing it. At that point, many people go into it looking for ways to justify their worldview rather than let scripture speak for itself.
Most origin of life scientists are coming to the uncomfortable conclusion that Darwin's theories have insurmountable problems.
There’s no such thing as a “kind”.
Evolution by natural selection is a fact of nature and the very backbone of science.
Macro evolution and micro evolution are the same thing and there’s no defining factor between the two.
Darwin might be right that evolution is no more guided than the wind, but why would he say the wind is wholly unguided?
The wind e.g. at pentecost was certainly guided.
A good, nuanced take. Thank you
My man just mentioned how dinosaurs had sharp teeth and then said they were herbivores?
Who cares if there is a conflict or not! Just follow the evidence where ever it leads. PERIOD.
A religious friend of mine told me he doesn't believe in evolution because it conflicts with his Christianity. Got it. If the facts don't support your preferred belief just ignore the evidence... what could possibly go wrong...?
@@bobskane4353
Exactly. Ignorance is bliss.
But what happens when you are 80 years old and you had the same world view from when you were 12 years old?
Youre basically an 80 year old baby, that believes in talking snakes and magical trees and the simple stories told in Sunday school
Youre gonna die thinking like a 12 year old.
I have friends and family members like this...
The evidence points to Jesus. But I’ll be hard pressed if god didn’t make the dinosaurs. They are BONES found ground, they aren’t some hallucination.
Conflict leads to problems. This can lead to the rejection of either faith or science. This is why people need to find harmony.
@@ndjarnag, let people believe what they want.
What process differentiates micro from macro? And direct us to the limits and how you know those limits are there.
There are no processes that differ between the two. The difference is length of time.
Evolutionary biologist here. Nothing, absolutely nothing. They’re both just evolution, at best maybe a timespan difference, but there’s no boundary of degree of change to mean that two such terms can be defined anymore than little evolution versus a bit more evolution.
I love the fact that you make your claims based upon your personal version, your personal interpretation of Christianity.
Only problem with this is that all the different kinds of evolutions that you mention do not say everything happened in 7 days. No matter how you spin it, evolution and the bible are incompatible. Either the bible is right and evolution is wrong, or the bible is wrong and evolution is right. But these two do not spread the same message. You can't believe in both because they say different things
this is 100% correct. thank you. And 7 day creation is so mythical, even most 7 year olds know it's not true after a few science classes
I put off watching this, fearing it would ruin my day with stupid arguments. Instead, I appreciate this sensible thesis. Can you be Cristian and believe in evolution? Technically yes, as long as you're still Christian.
It's a tautology, but one that's worth pointing out, thanks!
77dreimaldie0 Was it a relief when you heard this?
Very reasonable very cool
But you acknowledge that it is possible for the intelligence to be created by accident, right?
@@historicalperspective I acknowledge that something could emerge which I wouldn't be able to distinguish from intelligence. Everything beyond that is a philosophical discussion I'm not motivated to get into.
However, science acknowledges vice versa that a Godly creator might have created the universe and exists outside spacetime. Acknowledgement of possibility not a very useful argument in either direction
@@77dreimaldie0 that is entirely possible, considering that space and time are infinite it is totally possible that there are already beings who have ascended beyond space and time, and who either created us, guided our evolution, merely observe us, or don't even know that we exist at all.
Why are Christians defining which version of evolution they believe in? It is not up to Christianity to agree or disagree in how common ancestry works.
The word “evolution” is equivocal and actually can mean five different things including the one definition you gave-common ancestry.
@@SeanMcDowell The only one that bears any weight is the standard model. The evolutionary biologist's standard model.
i don’t think they work together science and a book evolution is changing over time it is said that adam and eve looked like us today so they can’t be in the same reality
You’re right. Evolution is the opposite of Genesis as God says “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution says “Through death, man came into the world”. Both can’t be right and to believe in evolution is to think God isn’t telling the truth which can quickly lead to falling away from the faith like so many do in college.
Theistic evolution warned against by;
Peter in 2 Peter 3:3-6 explicitly
Paul in Galatians 1 a different gospel
John in Revelation 22 adding to scripture.
If point 3 is true, God would have used evolution, which by definition means natural selection acting on random mutations. This is referred to as "theistic evolution". That doesn't seem to leave room for God directing the process. It would also impy that the Genesis account is not accurate. When Jesus quoted Genesis saying that God "created them from the beginning male and female", he implied that Adam and Eve were real individuals--a special creation.
I've asked a number of creationist friends to define the word "kind" as they use it in this debate. I'm looking for a rigid, defensible definition, one that can be expressed in simple trems. I have never yet received such a definition. Given that the concept of the "kind" is critical to the creationist account of origins, you'd think it would be easy to find such a definition, but so far, no luck.
"Interpret the bible in a way that you continue to give tithing." - Every pastor ever
If there was conscious design in evolution, then please explain the appendix
Sure. It’s helps,the bodies immune system and fights off infection
@@metaldisciple it goes bad tries to kill you
@@metaldisciple Now please explain why knees and the back are so badly designed? Seems to me like it's a common issue when you go from a 4 legged animal to a two legged, GODDAMN IT MY KNEES HURT AGAIN! If we were designed then God is a b-word.
@@metaldisciple Also yeah, the appendix is totally worthless and attempts to murder you on several attempts.
@@normalperson397 I think our knees and back are doing just fine if we made it this far
I'm having an existential crisis...
You good bruh? Regardless of what you believe it takes faith. Put your faith in Jesus. I choose to view the world through the Biblical worldview. No recently invented theories about ape-men for me.
I think the main take away here is all options can be believed in regardless of what it is, or if God is involved or not, because all of them cannot be 100% verified to be the truth, so in the they are ultimately all belief systems.
Nothing is blind and purposeless, as god controls everything
"kind" is not a word used in science. That would mean nothing to a biologist.
This is dogma. You should care about truth, not only accepting things that don’t conflict with things you happen to already believe. This is insanity
But it is something to point out that if you don’t believe in evolution then learning it’s a thing and stuff like a global flood never happened can be a slap in the face
Hi Sean
Hope you see this. My question is do you believe death entered the world through Adam? If so then at least for man if not every other creature, did all gradual changes into man, I mean the almost man, almost dog, almost cat, almost …you get the picture. Did they all live together till death came and so we should have millions of transitional forms in the fossil record? I am not saying GOD couldn’t do it but I don’t think what we find demonstrates that HE did.
such a bizarre question, considering Adam was just a child of his ancestors. And his ancestors were ancestors of ancestors of Apes...
Well since the man responsible for sequencing the Human Genome & proving common ancestry is a Christian…..I’d say yes.
All of the atheists in the comments are acting like we have to ignore science to believe God
Have y’all ever considered the possibility that God and science are perfectly compatible as in one can be compelled by the science the conclude there is a creator?
Thank you, i have been worrying about continuing with Christianity or becoming only an evolutionist
I’m an evolutionary biologist. When he said ‘evolution is a blind purposeless unguided process’, then he entirely gave a deliberate false view of evolution, which at core is a guided process, that very process being defined in Darwin’s own words as natural selection. So kindly, I’d suggest that’s a huge red flag on anything he says.
That is some mental gymnastics there..he does not believe in the bible then.
In order to continue believing in religion in the age of information you have to choose ignorance and do a lot of mental gymnastics. I used to know a Christian girl who was pretty devout but would admit the anti-LGBTQ rhetoric in Christianity is flaw. Religion is all or nothing. If you’re convinced an omniscient being wrote these books and you’re refuting some of it as nonsense then you are acknowledging that god isn’t all knowing. You’re admitting that you wiser than god.
My biggest worry is the suffering of animals before Adam and Eve.
No, it's the other way around. It depends on how much you feel you need to hang on to the literal text of your holy book whether your faith can accommodate the rational acceptance of a scientific explanation that happens to be irreconcilable with a literal interpretation of that text.
Take a stand for Gods word Sean. Stop caring about views on tiktok and UA-cam
A Christian can interpret the bible how they’d like. How we got here is irrelevant. What matters is your relationship now with God
If a god exists why only use earth? The universe is likely hundreds of thousands of light years, it’s rather unambitious to not use more of space to create more life.
He left out the controversial idea of God using millions of years worth of Survival of the fittest to bring about his creation.
in other words, if i change the definition of words i can believe whatever i want. got it.
Well, it doesn't matter what the first ever fairytale book says, evolution is real and it has many proofs but the flying invisible guy in the sky doesn't have any proof.
If you don't believe in evolution you can look up the proofs and get educated
Sean is clearly operating in good faith and his slicing and dicing of concepts is very sophisticated to the point that it gives the false impression of being true or correct, when it is demonstrably false. Although factually proven wrong in most of what he says here, I still admire his incessant attempts to reconcile all the factually incorrect statements in the bible with what we know for a fact to be true because of scientific confirmation by redefining terms and producing artificial categories and sub-categories that convey the appearance of true knowledge. Again, I respect him as he comes from a place of love and trying to be a good Christian, even if in doing so he ends up twisting like a pretzel in trying to make biblical knowledge look like actual facts.
I would love to review the counterfactuals you refer to proving Sean wrong. Can you give some references I can look up?
What if our ancestor you know monkeys or whatever are just inbreed of humans and fallen angels mean't to watch over us?
Can you define kind.
I can, but I'm an atheist.. lol. So obviously I'll just cite evolution, and not be incongruent with reality.
Species
Use your brain. 😂 I’m sure this isn’t a hard word for you.
@@desertrose0601 Yeah, but it seems to be a hard one for creationists...
Most Christian denominations accept evolution. I looked it up, the only two that do not are Baptists, and Evangelicals
-Atheist
If you believe that death entered into the world because of original sin then how can you possibly believe in a God guided macro evolution?
Well…I’ve never heard a theory of an evolved species that crossed up somewhere in its history. And sorry if God truly exists, he’s already said that creatures have free will, and that would probably include their need to survive and evolve within their dna and ability change. So, either way, they changed the way they did without god guiding the process.
I belive in evolution guided by God
So how do you reconcile God saying “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution saying “Through death, man came into the world”? Both can’t be right.
Smh 😂 Why do ya always give something you dont have, credit for something you dont understand. I get the "because I dont understand then god" but dang.
What do you believe is the most credible stance?
I think Darwin was right as far as there was a process but wrong as it's not designed
Evolution is a theory that fits the observed facts. It does not require or involve any beleif.
If a theory is not believed, then it ceases to be a theory, correct? Every person who experiments and observed believes and changes their beliefs based on their understanding. Otherwise Darwin would never have described evolution. Darwin held beliefs that led him to describe evolution.
@@patientestant false. there is no element of belief required. a theory is measured on how well it fits the observed facts. theories on the topic are compared by how well they fit the observations and the one that does that best is considered the best theory.
@@patientestant false. And false.
Back up. Evolution is observed. It is a fact
@@Johnsmith-hp6tw and @billjohnson9472 If people don't believe in what they see, how can they build a theory for what they observed? There are many beliefs and assumptions to every experiment. If people don't believe a theory, they do not teach it, they don't perform experiments. We would literal not do anything if we did not believe in something.
@@Johnsmith-hp6tw the development of different species via evolution is a theory, not a fact. a really well supported theory, but theories do not "graduate" to facts.
I hold two theistic evolution.
2 Peter 3:3-6 predicts evolution, aka uniformitarianism, and warns against it. Conversely, Noah’s flood is catastrophism.
Fiction
Mount St Helen aftermath is evidence of catastrophism.
@@wingandprayer8 ... Ok? That was a volcano... It happens quite often.
Noah's story is fiction
Fr thanks I‘ve watched too many videos which were absolutely not with a neutral view. Of course I think I know what your opinion is but at least you don‘t let the other opinion look stupid
how can a christian being honest when in the same time they believe change across kinds is possible when the bible says animals will brought forth according to its kind?,do you guys believe fish kind produce cat kind?,none of these is biblical
the bible is not a science book. it is a library of stories and testimonies from the perspective of the writers. They were revolutionary, but God still calls us to discern and seek what we might see in this era of time, with the scientific and social knowledge available to us. God does not stop calling us to move closer with the knowledge available in every place and time.
@@staciewittenmyer1011 complete unbiblical nonsense made by someone who didnt genuinely want to know science but was just ashamed by biblical creation stories and avoid it,its said there multiple times from FIRST book of genesis to the gospel that adam is real and that This world is made in 6 days, evolution is not only unbiblical, its not gospel-like,cuz gospel luke shows genealogy of Jesus it shows adam as real person,adam is not a dumb ape,he speaks,he SPEAKS with God
You technically can still be a Christian and believe in evolution since we are saved by our faith in Jesus Christ work on the cross, but it’s a very slippery slope into apostasy. To believe in evolution is to not believe Genesis as God says “Through man, death came into the world” and evolution says “Through death, man came into the world”, both can’t be right. To believe in evolution is to believe God is not telling the truth which makes a believer constantly question the entire bibles authenticity. Evolution hinders our faith in God greatly and has caused the falling away of many believers. Let God be true and every man a liar!
If you have a theory you shouldn’t try to prove your theory but disprove it. And if your theory is fool-proof then you have effectively proven it. But since technically you cannot disprove (or prove) religion it should not even be worth the breath it takes to discuss and the time it takes to type.
Faith helps many people.
Genesis is just as metaphorical as Revelation
God isn't required for evolution. Solution for an equation doesn't require an extra variable. I dunno if you understand math.
That is a good point macro versus micro is the basic point but darling the kennel believer unfortunately after he died
If millions of things died before humans ever came around, then death didn't enter the world by sinful man. Evolution is biblical heresy plain and simple.
No, true death is spiritual death. God threw Adam and Eve out of the garden of eden so that they should not take from the tree of life and live forever. If they already would what is the point of saying that?
But also you can believe that God created an existance without physical death thats outside this current universe scientific history with the fall causally prior to this universe, which would avoid the problem of animal suffering pre-fall. Most barriers the creationists set up is due to people subconciously thinking: Sure God is powerful, but he can't be That powerful.
@@MrMuruks I'm not really sure what you're getting at here. Seems like jumping through a lot of philosophical hoops to avoid that evolution is simply not biblically sound. God is never portrayed in the Bible as a survival of the fittest type of God, so why would He set that into motion in order to create our world when He can simply speak anything into existence? It's simply not consistent with His character. Nor is it consistent as someone else pointed out here as far as everything producing after it's kind. When He created everything He called it good. Why would He need things to evolve for millions of years to finally be good? Way too many mental hoops have to be set up to jump through in order to make evolution work. It's not even scientific since we can't observe it, so why not just trust the Genesis creation account as God portrayed it as opposed to going off with some other kind of wildly worldly religious fantasy about the beginning of things. Much simpler and more biblically consistent.
Even if you understand Genesis 1 and 2 literalistically, nowhere does it say that plants or animals didnt die before humans. Do you really believe the blue whale, for example, was vegetarian rather than krill-eating?
@@PC-vg8vn Interesting thought but I would simply point you to Genesis 1:29-30
Amen
In other words, as long as it fits the ark myth...minus all of the feeding, sanitation, and logistic issues of course.
Have you seen the ark in Kentucky. They really answer a lot of those questions
Not really. You are thinking of YEC. Most Christians throughtout history have had no problem with the earth being older than 10000 years. Geological strata was only discovered in the 1600-1700s. By this time most Christians understood the earth to be millions if not billions of years old. When Darwin came up with his hypothesis and later theory, most Christians accepted it. By 1910s the only opposition Christians had against evolution was implication of Eugenics. Evolution by itself was accepted. Only the SDA taught a 6000 year old earth. The whole global flood and 6000 year old earth became popular in 1960s. Look up Joshua Moritz lectures on UA-cam.
@@michaelmalaki7176 I know exactly what I’m thinking of. Ken ham. Answers in genesis. All those questions are answered to a degree to be beyond plausible.
Neither the writings of Peter, Paul, Matthew, John, Jude, James, and the Words of Jesus himself, indicate that they believed in in milions of years of evolution. They ALL refered to the OT as writings being historical, and with historical persons. And Jesus refferred to Adam and Eve as historical persons. If we take the text seriously (Peter say" there is nothing in our writings more than you can read or understand ") evolution is out of the question.... Jon the theologian
Agree to disagree. Thats what you are doing.
I wish you did research to understand evolution. I would take you more seriously.
What the hell is a “kind”?
Don't worry, everyone will devolved into crab pretty soon, so it's okay.
my priest said genesis is obviously fake.
Or if by evolution you mean:
Mud -> MAN -> Rib -> woMAN
Of course!!! No problemo!
And what’s so funny is that we now know that women are actually the default sex, and men are really just women who have the SRY gene
watch?v=mw2LCTQHMUI
there you go