Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Creationism vs Theistic Evolutionism

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search
[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]

Is Theistic Evolution OK for Christians?

Contents

Background and Context of Debate:

Ever since Darwin first published his theory of evolution, the church has been divided over the issue of whether or not to accept it. This is because macroevolution as described by Darwin contradicts the account of creation in the book of Genesis. The Catholic and High Anglican Churches and other mainstream Churches have now see no problem with this theory, but many smaller but faster growing Evangelical Churches retain their literalist stance and feel that Christians who accept evolution are compromising their faith. This debate covers the Theistic Evolutionism vs Creationism controversy only, related debates such as Old Earth vs Young Earth Creationism, The scientific validity of evolution, the Age of the Earth and the teaching of creationism in science are all hyperlinked in the related debates section.

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

What does the Bible say on the subject?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • The Biblical account of Creation flies squarely in the face of macroevolutionism. The Bible says that God created everything perfect, but Darwin's theory maintains that the first organisms were the simplest ones and therefore clearly imperfect. Also the Bible says that death began at the fall, but evolutionists say that survival of the fittest (which involves death of the unfit and imperfect) has been going on since well before mankind arrived on the scene and therefore before the fall.





[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Does evolution allow room for God?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • Evolution allows little room for God. God is all powerful. Why would he want to create something imperfect, and allow nature to take its course? Even if God directed all the processes of evolution to create the creatures that he wanted, it begs one big question: why didn't he create a perfect creature to start off with and save time? The theory of macro-evolution, if accepted by believers, always causes massive theological complications and awkwardnesses like this.




[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Are there advantages for the church if it accepts evolution?

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con

  • The Church will appear weak if it accepts macro-evolution. People often, whether accurately or not, consider Faith to be at odds with Science. If the Church swallows evolution it will be seen as attempting to defend itself by appeasing its opponents by trying to find common ground with them instead of exposing the flaws in the one theory ever to have been called scientific that the Church have ever had a real problem with. The Church should be seeking to expand and stick up for its beliefs if it is to survive, so it shouldn't be looking for ways to make concessions.
  • Evolution is vital for Atheism to survive. There is no other reputable explanation of the origins of life that does not (at least at surface level) necessarily involve a creator of some sort, so macro- evolution is to Atheism what the One Ring is to Sauron in The Lord of the Rings- if it is debunked finally and indisputably in public, Atheism will become illogical and as a result of this many may turn to Christ; which is what the Church wants and also what it needs. It is an unwritten principle of Secularism that no religion or major irreligious worldview should ever be indisputably disproven or proven to be unethical because this might offend some people. This explains why so many people are fighting so hard to keep evolution alive. Should the Church follow the crowd and join their efforts? The answer is a resounding "never".
  • Christianity has nothing against Science. Since macro- evolution is not valid as science in the first place, as it is not an observable process, the Church has no need to support it. Of course, the Church is not obliged to blindly follow Science anyway, but when they attempt to do so in this case they only weaken themselves.





References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

Debate: Age of the Earth, http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Biblical_inerrancy, http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Creationism_vs_evolution_in_schools, http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Evolution, http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Intelligent_design, http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:_Old_Earth_Creationism_vs_Young_Earth_Creationism


External links and resources:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v4/n1/linguistics-genesis-and-evolution http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2011/07/08/feedback-theistic-evolution

,,,

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.