Ask Me Help Desk - Evolution Compromise?

Hi, I posted this in Christian forum but it disappeared and someone told me to discuss evolutionism there is not allowed.

I was talking about this issue with my friend who is an Evolutionist, we thought why can't there be a compromise between Evolutionists and Christians, some Evolutionists say there theory doesn't work with the Bible, but we figured out a way... bare with me...

Evolutionism says Man evolved from other creatures that were like him, right? That sounds against the Bible but just wait...

The Bible says that God created Man in His own image, which is to say, he looked like Him. So what if Man evolved from God? I know its kind of a long shot and it would take a lot of study from theolgists and scientists, but we think it is a great Compromise that would answer the great question, where did we come from?

-fjb

The problem with religion and science is that they deal with entirely different subject matter. Religion deals with metaphysical issues while science deals empirical issues. At the moment there is no satisfactory theory which links the two. This is despite attempts throughout history of many great minds to create a link. Some might argue that Kant has come the closest.

For Freeman J Biggs' idea to be viable he would need to explain what he means by 'evolved from'. Is this to be used in a metaphysical sense or and empirical sense?
Secondly, there is the problem of Empirical Theism. How do we get the idea of a perfect being based on our observations within the material world?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freeman J Biggs

Hi, I posted this in Christian forum but it disappeared and someone told me to discuss evolutionism there is not allowed.

I was talking about this issue with my friend who is an Evolutionist, we thought why can't there be a compromise between Evolutionists and Christians, some Evolutionists say there theory doesn't work with the Bible, but we figured out a way...bare with me...

Evolutionism says Man evolved from other creatures that were like him, right? That sounds against the Bible but just wait...

The Bible says that God created Man in His own image, which is to say, he looked like Him. So what if Man evolved from God? I know its kind of a long shot and it would take alot of study from theolgists and scientists, but we think it is a great Compromise that would answer the great question, where did we come from?

-fjb

Christians accept that God created man to rule over this planet. If you want to believe the theory of evolution then man is just an animal with no authority to rule over anything. There can be no compromise since Christians believe it is compromise that has landed us where we are. Should we fall for the same glib talk twice. Science cannot demonstrate evolution yet science is all about documenting demonstratable fact. Darwin was an observer and most of his observation was about geology yet we take his theories about biology seriously. God told us what he considered we needed to know, he didn't give us all the details and he didn't ask us to fill in the blanks. This is why science has difficulty with the biblical explanation but take the words of one eminent scientist
"I just want to know the thoughts of God everything else is just the details" Albert Einstein. I happen to agree we are too caught up in documenting everything down to the last detail instead of enjoying the ride.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paraclete

Christians accept that God created man to rule over this planet. If you want to believe the theory of evolution then man is just an animal with no authority to rule over anything. There can be no compromise since Christians believe it is compromise that has landed us where we are. Should we fall for the same glib talk twice. Science cannot demonstrate evolution yet science is all about documenting demonstratable fact. Darwin was an observer and most of his observation was about geology yet we take his theories about biology seriously. God told us what he considered we needed to know, he didn't give us all the details and he didn't ask us to fill in the blanks. this is why science has difficulty with the biblical explanation but take the words of one eminent scientist
"I just want to know the thoughts of God everything else is just the details" Albert Einstein. I happen to agree we are too caught up in documenting everything down to the last detail instead of enjoying the ride.

I agree with what you are saying. In the end my belief in God is a matter of faith. Arguments that I have put forward are a matter for debate just like all knowledge can be up for debate.
To be honest, many of the arguments that I have put forward contain things that I don't necessarily believe are true. I also know that for every argument we construct it is always possible to come up with an alternative position.

Why do I do it? Because it is a challenge and it is fun. The challenge is constructing an argument which you don't necessarily believe is true and the fun bit is actually constructing the argument.

The bible account makes solidly clear that things created reproduce after there own kind. We are not Gods. We are godlike in form and figure,just not in function. God is definitely not a polliwog,or a reptile,nor a primate. The primary difference from the Darwinist conclusions and the creationist conclusions have to do with probability. What are the chances that we evolved from God? The inclination presumes that , as in the process of natural selection,God was not strong enough to survive. When so many of us really know God personally and are continually effected by his power this logic will easily be found unreasonable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by belovedgift

The bible account makes solidly clear that things created reproduce after there own kind. we are not Gods. we are godlike in form and figure,just not in function. God is definitely not a polliwog,or a reptile,nor a primate. The primary difference from the Darwinist conclusions and the creationist conclusions have to do with probability. what are the chances that we evolved from God? The inclination presumes that , as in the process of natural selection,God was not strong enough to survive. When so many of us really know God personally and are continually effected by his power this logic will easily be found unreasonable.

There is no chance we evolved fron God or that God evolved. Scientiests cannot explain 75% of the physical universe and call it dark energy so there is something to account for the behaviour they observe, now if you substiture dark energy for God you have an equally teneble explanation. Darwin had an idea that life adapts to the constrains of its surroundings. That is what he really concluded.This may be true and may take place quicker than we think, but it does not give rise to new species. What it does give us are differences. All human beings can be shown by science to link to a single ancestor and this is what the Bible tells us.

God tells us, humans, as well as the species we presently share this planet with, that we have been here about 6,000 years. We know that in earler times a great deal of the Earth was not habitable anyway. The Bible says this, the Earth was formless and void, whatever that than might mean but it might be explained by the extinction level events which scientists say occur about every 25 Million years or the super volcanos are said to occur about every 500,000 years. If you listen to geologists and others the events that have taken place on Earth mean we could not and should not have existed much further back than that anyway. So I don't see the conflict between the Bible and science, just conflict with the way the facts might be interpreted

I'd say you can at most approach him with the following premises

- God set the big bang in motion
- Considering god is all-knowing and all-powerful he could antecipate how everything would turn out and have the means to make it so
- In his method, earth came to be formed and humanity to have appeared

It does somehow link two scientific theories and include god's hand.