Do most christians deny Evolution?
回答 (80)
2020-02-20 12:42 am
Considering about 65% of the world's Christians are either Catholic or Orthodox, only about 35% are protestant (and not even all protestants deny evolution), evolution deniers worldwide are in very small minority of Christians.
2020-02-20 4:37 am
Most Christians do not deny any facts of science. Jesus Christ founded one Church, said it was to remain one, and promised that one Church the fullness of God's truth until the end of time. As a result of that divine guarantee of truth, the teaching of that one Church (which includes well over half of all Christians) never conflicts with natural truths revealed by science. Truth cannot conflict with truth.
2020-02-20 5:42 am
A Christian must believe what Jesus Christ believes. Jesus said:
Matthew 19:4-6
4 In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female 5 and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? 6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.”
He said created, not evolved. He spoke about the man and his wife, not less than that. Jesus also said:
John 8:31, 32
31 Then Jesus went on to say to the Jews who had believed him: “If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Also, the inspired scriptures say:
Romans 3:4
"But let God be found true, though every man be found a liar.”
Most scientists who espouse macroevolution are either atheists or agnostics. This term, which is in many textbooks, teaches that small changes accumulated slowly over billions of years and produced the big changes needed to make fish into amphibians and apelike creatures into men.
Eighteenth-century scientist LaPlace said concerning the idea of God as Creator "I have no need for that hypothesis".
The bottom line is, no matter how you define it, evolution, in order to be true, has to at least hypothesize how space, matter, energy and forces, and life itself began. It is a lot more complicated than the idea of the Big Bang - in fact, where IT came from has to be answered in this universe where effects come from causes. There is also no inkling of how an unguided universe came up with the complex fine-tuning of laws that hold it together.
Despite the insistence that evolutionists make that they do not address origins, they have to do so. With everything that happens, there is a beginning. The universe has been established as having a beginning. So, in order to be true, macroevolution must satisfactorily answer these questions:
How Did Life Begin?
Is Any Form of Life Really Simple?
Where Did the Instructions Come From?
Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor?
The answers to these questions cannot be shown to be in favor of Darwinian or macroevolution.
Some amino acids have been formed in the lab, but life also needs specific lipids, proteins, carbohydrates and nucleic acids arranged in homochiral structures.
The idea that this can be done in a primordial earth without a predetermined pattern is not logical.
The instructions to do this cannot be determined by chance because the probability of such a development never happening by chance is greater than the estimated number of particles in the universe.
The fossil record reveals sudden appearances of major body structures with no intermediate links.
Atheism and macroevolution do not, and cannot, explain it. There are no non-intelligent forms of natural selection found in the universe. The forces of current microevolutionary activity are very similar to intelligence.
With a house, there is an architect who designed it and a builder. You cannot even make a pot without clay and a potter who knows what a pot looks like.
The Origin of Life - Five questions worth asking
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/publication/r1/lp-e/lf
Matthew 19:4-6
4 In reply he said: “Have you not read that the one who created them from the beginning made them male and female 5 and said: ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh’? 6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together, let no man put apart.”
He said created, not evolved. He spoke about the man and his wife, not less than that. Jesus also said:
John 8:31, 32
31 Then Jesus went on to say to the Jews who had believed him: “If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
Also, the inspired scriptures say:
Romans 3:4
"But let God be found true, though every man be found a liar.”
Most scientists who espouse macroevolution are either atheists or agnostics. This term, which is in many textbooks, teaches that small changes accumulated slowly over billions of years and produced the big changes needed to make fish into amphibians and apelike creatures into men.
Eighteenth-century scientist LaPlace said concerning the idea of God as Creator "I have no need for that hypothesis".
The bottom line is, no matter how you define it, evolution, in order to be true, has to at least hypothesize how space, matter, energy and forces, and life itself began. It is a lot more complicated than the idea of the Big Bang - in fact, where IT came from has to be answered in this universe where effects come from causes. There is also no inkling of how an unguided universe came up with the complex fine-tuning of laws that hold it together.
Despite the insistence that evolutionists make that they do not address origins, they have to do so. With everything that happens, there is a beginning. The universe has been established as having a beginning. So, in order to be true, macroevolution must satisfactorily answer these questions:
How Did Life Begin?
Is Any Form of Life Really Simple?
Where Did the Instructions Come From?
Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor?
The answers to these questions cannot be shown to be in favor of Darwinian or macroevolution.
Some amino acids have been formed in the lab, but life also needs specific lipids, proteins, carbohydrates and nucleic acids arranged in homochiral structures.
The idea that this can be done in a primordial earth without a predetermined pattern is not logical.
The instructions to do this cannot be determined by chance because the probability of such a development never happening by chance is greater than the estimated number of particles in the universe.
The fossil record reveals sudden appearances of major body structures with no intermediate links.
Atheism and macroevolution do not, and cannot, explain it. There are no non-intelligent forms of natural selection found in the universe. The forces of current microevolutionary activity are very similar to intelligence.
With a house, there is an architect who designed it and a builder. You cannot even make a pot without clay and a potter who knows what a pot looks like.
The Origin of Life - Five questions worth asking
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/publication/r1/lp-e/lf
2020-02-20 5:23 am
Not ones I personally know
2020-02-20 8:34 am
Most no. It is a Bumpkin Cracker Science thing.
2020-02-20 2:39 am
All true Christian believe that God created all in heaven and on earth.
There was no Evolution.
There was no Evolution.
2020-02-20 12:45 am
A. because it makes no friggin sense that all this complexity would develop from nothing for no reason.....just stupid
B. if Modern man has been around for 200,000 years what was he doing for the first 194,000 Its not all that hard for figure out if you plant a seed i grows that you can make fire by friction and the simple tools make the job easier, that is all the technology Egypt had and they built an amazing civilization
C. God said how he made man from the dust of the earth and imparted life to Him
D. Oh and the complete and utter lack of proof
B. if Modern man has been around for 200,000 years what was he doing for the first 194,000 Its not all that hard for figure out if you plant a seed i grows that you can make fire by friction and the simple tools make the job easier, that is all the technology Egypt had and they built an amazing civilization
C. God said how he made man from the dust of the earth and imparted life to Him
D. Oh and the complete and utter lack of proof
2020-02-20 9:39 am
True Christians know that God created the life on this planet and it's not do to evolution. True Christians uphold the word of God as truth.
2020-02-21 4:44 am
It's always been my belief that, if God is a master engineer, and He would have to be to create a Universe, that He would have implemented a system of adaptability into the creatures He created.
We have engineers who design spacecraft that can adapt, so surely He would have done the same with His design.
We have engineers who design spacecraft that can adapt, so surely He would have done the same with His design.
2020-02-20 12:49 am
One problem Evolutionists have is that they keep asking about it in relation to religion, making evolution a religious belief when it is supposed to be a science issue.The Left can't seem to notice that pattern in everything they do. Climate Change is not a science issue if the Left keeps trying to make it a political one. The Left never even skirts the issue of why believing in Evolution is important. I can believe in science easily when it comes to other fields of science. But the Left keeps making evolution into a believe it all or nothing issue. I don't think believing in evolution is important. Why does it matter how many Christians believe or deny it?
參考: bisexual Christian
2020-02-20 12:51 am
Only a few... the majority of Christians understand how science work... but those few are the "special" ones
2020-02-20 12:40 am
Not all, just the pea brained Ken, Kent, Ray and Billy Boy Craig followers.
2020-02-23 3:07 pm
Any person who calls God a liar is surely no Christian. In that regard, NO Christian ever calls God a liar. And they cannot and do not embrace the lie of evolution.
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Now either he did - or he didnt. So which is it Christians?
Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
1Ti 6:20 ¶ Keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Now either he did - or he didnt. So which is it Christians?
Num 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
1Ti 6:20 ¶ Keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
2020-02-20 9:25 pm
Who does KNOW MOST Christians?
I am a Christian who knows evolution is a fact. But no human being knows most Christian. This question cannot be answered.
I am a Christian who knows evolution is a fact. But no human being knows most Christian. This question cannot be answered.
2020-02-20 4:10 am
baffles me as to why the two concepts are seen as mutually exclusive; nothing in Evolution denies the idea that a God could still be there setting it all in motion. (so far, so "intelligent design"...) interesting it only seems to be the more bizarre sorts of American Chrisitianity that are so virulently against it and spend a lot of time and effort trying to disprove it. But when you get people conditioned to think everything is only 7000 years old, maybe that sort of conditioning simply cannot conceive the four-billion year old timescale of this planet - and the fourteen billion year old age of the universe as a whole. Of course evolution can't happen in seven millenia. But over four billion years the time is there for all these things to happen at their own pace. And in whose holy book does it say that ten thousand years are as a second in the eyes of God? God, if he exists, is infinite. Now there's a word the born-again believers should look up and consider...
2020-02-20 1:19 am
Deny?
Nope, I don't deny it, I just think it requires more faith than God.
Nope, I don't deny it, I just think it requires more faith than God.
2020-02-21 10:48 pm
It is evolutionists who are brainwashed to believe that humanity came from animals and out of nothing. Having no purpose!
2020-02-20 7:36 am
“Deny” implies that evolutionism is a thing that actually happened.
The correct term for this is “believe”. No. We do not BELIEVE in the silly religion of evolutionism.
The correct term for this is “believe”. No. We do not BELIEVE in the silly religion of evolutionism.
2020-02-20 1:44 am
My understanding is that most Christians around the world realize evolution is fact, it's just a minority that is ignorant enough to deny it. I hope that's true.
2020-02-20 12:42 am
I find it convenient it takes millions of years to see any major evolutionary changes
2020-02-20 12:42 am
WE HOPE SO SINCE IT IS LIES...GENESIS TELLS WHAT GOD DID.
2020-02-24 9:20 am
The fact of the matter, if you're a true christian then you will deny evolution, because it is a lie, just like global warming, the planet temperature is all due to God control only, nothing else. same with the earth being billion of years old that is absurd, anyone who knows that are sun which is one of the smallest suns in the milky way galaxy, so it does not take a rocket scientist to know that mankind is a liar, and the reason why they want you in the dark is because they don't want you to have wisdom, knowledge, and understanding about real science, because real scientist do not think that are earth is billions or even millions of years old, are heaven and earth are exactly from creation 13,032 years old the date was 11013 BC. when God created the heaven and earth by speaking.
參考: King James holy bible
2020-02-22 3:03 am
You have no explanation for the universe and everything in it, which is just another display of the bankruptcy of evolutionary thinking. You really can't talk about how a species evolved until you explain the matter that supposedly started the species.
It is very sad that your teachers were more concerned teaching what to think (interpreting the facts/evidence for you) than teaching you how to think (how to evaluate the facts and interpret them for yourself).
I don't need to disprove what has never been proven, and what is needed to assert it is proven empirical evidence.
Really there is nothing to believe... It is a bunch of claims about what may have happened but it provides no real testable mechanism or cause and it does not explain much of anything.
I don't deny science, I challenge claims made by scientists because their claims do not appear to be supported by the evidence. This in fact is part of the scientific method and as a result, when I question claims based on the evidence, I am in fact affirming science and the scientific method. Those who avoid the questions and deny the evidence are the ones denying science!
In scientific terms, Creationists claim evidence from the Bible with corroboration of the observed origin of matter, and it is consistent with our belief. Evolutionists cannot say the same, and are frequently inconsistent, like life from non-life, exactly the opposite of laws of the universe; nonsense. Like wishing on a star, wishing for aliens or some form of life out there, or that pesky missing link, when there should be millions/billions.
Selection (Natural and unnatural) producing changes in expressed alleles within a genus has been observed.
Recombination - changes in the Chromosomes modifying existing information and expression of traits has been observed.
Formation of a new life form at or above the level of genus in the taxonomic ladder - never observed.
The only changes ever observed have only been limited to changes within an existing genus (kind) exactly as asserted by the text of Genesis. Changes beyond this have never actually been observed and there is a growing body of both observational and experimental evidence suggesting there is a definite barrier preventing the changes required for Common Descent to occur. There is simply no empirical evidence supporting the speculation of Common Descent. (Because there is no viable proposed mechanism for Common Descent, it does not qualify as a valid hypothesis).
Those asserting there is observed evolution without exception are referring to natural selection.. not Common Descent.
Evolution according to the scientific community is nothing more than a change in heritable traits from one generation to the next in reproductively distinct groups. It says nothing about the origin of the universe or life (Creation), and the notion of Common Descent (Darwinian evolution) is more of an add-on that is on its way out of the scientific community as a whole. Were it not for the political/social implications atheist scientists gave it, it would have been discarded decades ago.
A dozen evidences against evolution
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20180124221450AADsWuA
It is very sad that your teachers were more concerned teaching what to think (interpreting the facts/evidence for you) than teaching you how to think (how to evaluate the facts and interpret them for yourself).
I don't need to disprove what has never been proven, and what is needed to assert it is proven empirical evidence.
Really there is nothing to believe... It is a bunch of claims about what may have happened but it provides no real testable mechanism or cause and it does not explain much of anything.
I don't deny science, I challenge claims made by scientists because their claims do not appear to be supported by the evidence. This in fact is part of the scientific method and as a result, when I question claims based on the evidence, I am in fact affirming science and the scientific method. Those who avoid the questions and deny the evidence are the ones denying science!
In scientific terms, Creationists claim evidence from the Bible with corroboration of the observed origin of matter, and it is consistent with our belief. Evolutionists cannot say the same, and are frequently inconsistent, like life from non-life, exactly the opposite of laws of the universe; nonsense. Like wishing on a star, wishing for aliens or some form of life out there, or that pesky missing link, when there should be millions/billions.
Selection (Natural and unnatural) producing changes in expressed alleles within a genus has been observed.
Recombination - changes in the Chromosomes modifying existing information and expression of traits has been observed.
Formation of a new life form at or above the level of genus in the taxonomic ladder - never observed.
The only changes ever observed have only been limited to changes within an existing genus (kind) exactly as asserted by the text of Genesis. Changes beyond this have never actually been observed and there is a growing body of both observational and experimental evidence suggesting there is a definite barrier preventing the changes required for Common Descent to occur. There is simply no empirical evidence supporting the speculation of Common Descent. (Because there is no viable proposed mechanism for Common Descent, it does not qualify as a valid hypothesis).
Those asserting there is observed evolution without exception are referring to natural selection.. not Common Descent.
Evolution according to the scientific community is nothing more than a change in heritable traits from one generation to the next in reproductively distinct groups. It says nothing about the origin of the universe or life (Creation), and the notion of Common Descent (Darwinian evolution) is more of an add-on that is on its way out of the scientific community as a whole. Were it not for the political/social implications atheist scientists gave it, it would have been discarded decades ago.
A dozen evidences against evolution
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20180124221450AADsWuA
2020-02-21 5:12 am
All Christians deny evolution! If they don't they are not true Christians. We know that God created heavens and earth and all that resides in it. Hebrews 3:4
2020-02-21 12:30 am
No, most believe that God created us using some form of evolution.
2020-02-20 11:23 pm
Some Christian sects do. Catholics accept evolution. As for my personal views, I don’t fully accept it. There really is no evidence one species changes into another. That’s a stretch of the imagination.
2020-02-20 9:08 pm
I'm a Christian and I believe in Evolution.
2020-02-20 4:34 pm
Hardly. A few do, as do a few agnostics, atheists, etc.
After all, Darwin was a Christian
After all, Darwin was a Christian
2020-02-20 4:57 am
I dont think so - But I dont know
what I THINK is that they shift the goal posts
They believe evolution but claim "god" was responsible for it
(its their "get out of jail free card" - anything comes up that they believe but contravenes the fundamentals of their belief they just claim "I believe it"- but "god" created it that way)
what I THINK is that they shift the goal posts
They believe evolution but claim "god" was responsible for it
(its their "get out of jail free card" - anything comes up that they believe but contravenes the fundamentals of their belief they just claim "I believe it"- but "god" created it that way)
2020-02-20 4:24 am
obviously, it is possible to hold two conflicting ideas at the same time without inner-conflict; this is why people have "religion" in the first place.
2020-02-20 4:12 am
Of course not. It seems that only american fundamentalist christians deny evolution.
2020-02-20 12:43 am
What other people think about this doesn't concern me. Why does it you?
2020-02-22 6:06 am
christian's believe how we came to be should be remain unsolved no amount of evidence will change that believing in god is just easy for them the christian way easy way out
2020-02-21 3:44 pm
Since those worshipping Jehovah must worship him with spirit and with truth, the answer is: all real Christians deny evolution. since it is not truth (John 4:24).
2020-02-20 10:18 pm
Yes, true Christians deny evolution.
2020-02-20 9:09 pm
That an intelligent Designer brought forth the universe is in harmony with what some scientists call the “big-bang” theory of creation. In recent years this theory has gained ascendancy over the “steady-state” theory, which claims that the universe has existed eternally, is without beginning.
Around the latter part of the last century and with the launching of the Hubble telescope, many scientists began to question the 'steady state' theory. Previously scientists had contended that because the universe had always existed, spontaneous life was not only possible, but after countless billions of years spontaneous life would have been inevitable.
Many educated Christians take into account the comments made by super-intelligent scientists like Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe.
“Once we see . . . that the probability of life, originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics on which life depends are in every respect ‘deliberate,’.....
From my earliest training as a scientist I was very strongly brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be very painfully shed. I am quite uncomfortable in the situation, the state of mind I now find myself in. But there is no logical way out of it.” Chandra Wickramasinghe.
“As biochemists discover more and more about the awesome complexity of life, it is apparent that the chances of it originating by accident are so minute that they can be completely ruled out. Life cannot have arisen by chance.....There is not a shred of objective evidence to support the hypothesis that life began in an organic soup here on the Earth...….As biochemists discover more and more about the awesome complexity of life, it is apparent that the chances of it originating by accident are so minute that they can be completely ruled out. Life cannot have arisen by chance...….Biologists indulge in unsubstantiated fantasies in order to deny what is so patently obvious, that the 200,000 amino acid chains, and hence life, did not appear by chance.”
On the question of how could the accidental coupling of chemicals in an organic ooze alone produce the 2,000 enzymes essential to life? Hoyle acknowledged that the possibilities are one in 10 to the power of 40,000, or “about the same as the chance of throwing an uninterrupted sequence of 50,000 sixes with unbiased dice! If one is not prejudiced either by social beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction that life originated [spontaneously] on the Earth, this simple calculation wipes the idea entirely out of court.”—Evolution From Space, Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe.
Although Hoyle never accepted the 'big bang theory many scientists today agree that the universe had a beginning. For example consider astronomer Robert Jastrow “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a Biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and Biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy.”—God and the Astronomers.
“Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power,
Not one of them is missing." Isaiah 40:26 For more information go to jw.org
Around the latter part of the last century and with the launching of the Hubble telescope, many scientists began to question the 'steady state' theory. Previously scientists had contended that because the universe had always existed, spontaneous life was not only possible, but after countless billions of years spontaneous life would have been inevitable.
Many educated Christians take into account the comments made by super-intelligent scientists like Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe.
“Once we see . . . that the probability of life, originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favourable properties of physics on which life depends are in every respect ‘deliberate,’.....
From my earliest training as a scientist I was very strongly brainwashed to believe that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate creation. That notion has had to be very painfully shed. I am quite uncomfortable in the situation, the state of mind I now find myself in. But there is no logical way out of it.” Chandra Wickramasinghe.
“As biochemists discover more and more about the awesome complexity of life, it is apparent that the chances of it originating by accident are so minute that they can be completely ruled out. Life cannot have arisen by chance.....There is not a shred of objective evidence to support the hypothesis that life began in an organic soup here on the Earth...….As biochemists discover more and more about the awesome complexity of life, it is apparent that the chances of it originating by accident are so minute that they can be completely ruled out. Life cannot have arisen by chance...….Biologists indulge in unsubstantiated fantasies in order to deny what is so patently obvious, that the 200,000 amino acid chains, and hence life, did not appear by chance.”
On the question of how could the accidental coupling of chemicals in an organic ooze alone produce the 2,000 enzymes essential to life? Hoyle acknowledged that the possibilities are one in 10 to the power of 40,000, or “about the same as the chance of throwing an uninterrupted sequence of 50,000 sixes with unbiased dice! If one is not prejudiced either by social beliefs or by a scientific training into the conviction that life originated [spontaneously] on the Earth, this simple calculation wipes the idea entirely out of court.”—Evolution From Space, Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe.
Although Hoyle never accepted the 'big bang theory many scientists today agree that the universe had a beginning. For example consider astronomer Robert Jastrow “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a Biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and Biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy.”—God and the Astronomers.
“Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power,
Not one of them is missing." Isaiah 40:26 For more information go to jw.org
2020-02-20 7:47 pm
hmmm.....christians believe God created all things, so yes they deny evolution...why do you even ask that
2020-02-20 6:11 pm
Evolution has never existed and darwin made it up with help of the d evil.
2020-02-20 11:17 am
Why the hell does it matter? prove your god exists, then we can discuss whether he created any planets or the creatures who live thereon
2020-02-20 11:10 am
Only the True Christians
2020-02-20 8:42 am
Nearly 100 % of all well educated people of faith (Christian and other) have no difficulty accepting the basic facts of modern science , including the basics of evolutionary biology.
The number is not so high among the poorly educated
The number is not so high among the poorly educated
2020-02-20 8:27 am
Any person who subscribes to the theory of Evolution is not a Christian.
2020-02-20 8:05 am
I have never asked most of them, However I can affirm that the majority of Evil Lucion is bunk, despite the many remains of skeletal creatures from Satan's early playground adventures involving many of his fallen Angel accomplices, leading to the complete destruction of Earths prior creation, leading up to Genesis Ch1 V2.
2020-02-20 12:49 am
Only the dark side of Christianity,
mostly located in distant lands by the South of North-America.
mostly located in distant lands by the South of North-America.
2020-02-20 12:45 am
Not at all. Most accept it just fine. Only a handful deny it, but, the rest of us seldom take them seriously.
2020-02-20 2:10 pm
The term depends on how it is defined.
As Catholics we believe mankind evolved from a lesser intelligent human form.
We did not evolve from a monkey or any other animal, nor a trousered ape!
Remember, Adam named the animals - of which are a gift to us; Genesis 2:20.
The above is what we believe as Christians, prehistoric man is not out of the question, but remember the word "man" is far different in definition than an "animal."
Arriving here on earth in the fallen form (prehistoric) was very essential.
Think for a moment: If we arrived on earth knowing what we just lost (supernatural abilities) I doubt we would have survived one day - suicide would have been more than likely the outcome.
However, being in a prehistoric form, unknowing our past allowed us to concentrate on one thing "survival" of which we successfully performed.
Much later when we evolved into a more intelligent creature our God began to speak to us.
The extensive period of time (evolving) allowed us to adjust to a harsh environment without the memory of our failure, as time passed the latter was more easily acceptable.
As Catholics we believe mankind evolved from a lesser intelligent human form.
We did not evolve from a monkey or any other animal, nor a trousered ape!
Remember, Adam named the animals - of which are a gift to us; Genesis 2:20.
The above is what we believe as Christians, prehistoric man is not out of the question, but remember the word "man" is far different in definition than an "animal."
Arriving here on earth in the fallen form (prehistoric) was very essential.
Think for a moment: If we arrived on earth knowing what we just lost (supernatural abilities) I doubt we would have survived one day - suicide would have been more than likely the outcome.
However, being in a prehistoric form, unknowing our past allowed us to concentrate on one thing "survival" of which we successfully performed.
Much later when we evolved into a more intelligent creature our God began to speak to us.
The extensive period of time (evolving) allowed us to adjust to a harsh environment without the memory of our failure, as time passed the latter was more easily acceptable.
2020-02-20 12:54 am
No they don't. Christianity is just a side-show which acts to
cover what Christians are incapable of explaining, and accepting.
cover what Christians are incapable of explaining, and accepting.
2020-02-20 12:41 am
No. Only American Calvinists - and it's debatable whether they are Christians. They certainly prefer Hebrew folklore to anything Jesus said or did.
2020-02-20 12:45 am
Mostly the "Monkey to Man" chart propaganda of science.
2020-02-20 12:41 am
Things change over time, no one denies that.
2020-02-21 11:55 am
Yes because they're brainwashed
2020-02-23 5:15 am
I am a Christian who believes in evolution. God created things and planned it all.
2020-02-22 8:05 am
No, I don't think many accept evolution. The statement that Catholics do believe it makes me think, the person speaking is mistaken.
2020-02-22 5:17 am
......it not true
2020-02-22 2:37 am
personally i think that there are small forms of evolution, id call it more of adaptation. But i don’t think that humans evolved from apes. Also evolution isn’t proven to be real, it’s mainly a theory.
2020-02-21 2:47 pm
No. not me, before I'm bad now just a little. Still evolving.
2020-02-21 4:46 am
Most accept it as fact. Dumdum fundies, well who cares what they think.
2020-02-21 4:46 am
There are two types of evolution. Macroevolution and microevolution.
Macro evolution which was the original tenet of Darwinian theory espoused that all life came from the sea. And that it came from a single life source or form. That is in total contrast to Christian teaching and believe which teach life comes from God and that he created each type originally and separate. The Darwinian theory has had not scientific evidence to back it up nor is it provable or observable.
Microevolution is not denied by Christians and is both observable in science.
Macro evolution which was the original tenet of Darwinian theory espoused that all life came from the sea. And that it came from a single life source or form. That is in total contrast to Christian teaching and believe which teach life comes from God and that he created each type originally and separate. The Darwinian theory has had not scientific evidence to back it up nor is it provable or observable.
Microevolution is not denied by Christians and is both observable in science.
2020-02-21 2:12 am
Perhaps we should start by defining the term ‘evolution’. Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859 as a theory to explain the origins of biological diversity. And at the time, that’s all it was - a biological theory that Christians were in fact quick to declare as a biblical doctrine of creation. So yeah, some christians do believe that. I do believe in evolution as a Christian based on animals but not animals to human beings like apes.
2020-02-21 1:14 am
There's no scientific evidence of one creature evolving into another creature.
2020-02-20 10:41 pm
No, they don't. The only thing which is in dispute is the timescale for the creation of things. It is a contentious issue whether it is a literal six days or not and most of us have come to the conclusion that it is not but that one day, for God, could be an almost indeterminate period of time since He is Ageless and Eternal. A billion years set against eternity is almost literally like a drop in the ocean. What is also in question is how man managed to spring up on different continents at a time when travel was almost certainly severely restricted. Many seem to have overlooked the unlikelihood of man traveling to all known regions of the globe by his own devices. How is it possible, therefore, for mankind to have arisen in different regions if evolution itself is the only factor involved?
Taken from a scientific source:-
"There are two theories concerning the evolution of modern humans: the replacement model and the regional continuity model.
The replacement model suggests that archaic humans evolved first in Africa, before spreading into the Old World where they replaced Neanderthals around 60,000 years ago. This would suggest that all humans share a common African ancestry.
The regional continuity model proposes that humans evolved at roughly the same time in different regions from various settlements of local archaic humans.
Both models agree, however, that modern man is certainly descended from the archaic African communities, although whether they are central to human evolution or merely a single part of it is still debated."
So it would appear that the scientific community is undecided on one of the most fundamental mechanisms by which people came into existence.
Note ... "The regional continuity model proposes that humans evolved at roughly the same time in different regions from various settlements of local archaic humans."
This implies something other than random mutation, does it not? Since this is as clear as rock you are left concluding that too little is actually known for anyone to pass either of these 'theories' off as fact.
If man appeared in different regions at approximately the same time it is highly unlikely to have been a coincidence.
You are therefore left with the distinct possibility that man was created by Divine design with an unspecifiable time scale but which would fit in with the 'six day theory' if those 'days' are in fact, as I said, unspecified time periods more like an era or an eon.
What is remarkable, in terms of the scriptures, is that the author/s of those scriptures were somehow, almost miraculously, able to work out how the earth evolved as a planet from its onset and which is actually 100% credible, from a scientific point of view, with the requirements for that formation to have happened.
If the scriptures had simply said that in the beginning God created the world and the two original humans, Adam and Eve, then anyone claiming that evolution gazumped the scriptures might have a point but the plain fact of the matter is that they don't.
comments.
It is, of course, rather sad that neither of you would appear to have the intellectual capacity to understand what has been written there. Pangea is a theory and since I studied continental drift, as part of my science degree, I am aware of what you are saying but that is actually extremely unlikely if not impossible considering the timescales we are talking about. We are talking ~400,000 years set against ~385 million so that is a more or less absolute no. Light clearly did exists before our sun and in fact our sun, in terms of the age of the universe, is a somewhat new star. The sun is approx. 5B years old and the universe is approx. 13.8B years so work that one out, genius ….. ?
Nice try at denial, guys ……… or not. FPS.
To make it easier for you what I was saying is that many Christians believe that the process of evolution, if indeed that is what we were actually created by, was through Divine design over an extensive time period which, to the Eternal and Everlasting, would have been like a twinkle in the eye or one day, if you like.
Taken from a scientific source:-
"There are two theories concerning the evolution of modern humans: the replacement model and the regional continuity model.
The replacement model suggests that archaic humans evolved first in Africa, before spreading into the Old World where they replaced Neanderthals around 60,000 years ago. This would suggest that all humans share a common African ancestry.
The regional continuity model proposes that humans evolved at roughly the same time in different regions from various settlements of local archaic humans.
Both models agree, however, that modern man is certainly descended from the archaic African communities, although whether they are central to human evolution or merely a single part of it is still debated."
So it would appear that the scientific community is undecided on one of the most fundamental mechanisms by which people came into existence.
Note ... "The regional continuity model proposes that humans evolved at roughly the same time in different regions from various settlements of local archaic humans."
This implies something other than random mutation, does it not? Since this is as clear as rock you are left concluding that too little is actually known for anyone to pass either of these 'theories' off as fact.
If man appeared in different regions at approximately the same time it is highly unlikely to have been a coincidence.
You are therefore left with the distinct possibility that man was created by Divine design with an unspecifiable time scale but which would fit in with the 'six day theory' if those 'days' are in fact, as I said, unspecified time periods more like an era or an eon.
What is remarkable, in terms of the scriptures, is that the author/s of those scriptures were somehow, almost miraculously, able to work out how the earth evolved as a planet from its onset and which is actually 100% credible, from a scientific point of view, with the requirements for that formation to have happened.
If the scriptures had simply said that in the beginning God created the world and the two original humans, Adam and Eve, then anyone claiming that evolution gazumped the scriptures might have a point but the plain fact of the matter is that they don't.
comments.
It is, of course, rather sad that neither of you would appear to have the intellectual capacity to understand what has been written there. Pangea is a theory and since I studied continental drift, as part of my science degree, I am aware of what you are saying but that is actually extremely unlikely if not impossible considering the timescales we are talking about. We are talking ~400,000 years set against ~385 million so that is a more or less absolute no. Light clearly did exists before our sun and in fact our sun, in terms of the age of the universe, is a somewhat new star. The sun is approx. 5B years old and the universe is approx. 13.8B years so work that one out, genius ….. ?
Nice try at denial, guys ……… or not. FPS.
To make it easier for you what I was saying is that many Christians believe that the process of evolution, if indeed that is what we were actually created by, was through Divine design over an extensive time period which, to the Eternal and Everlasting, would have been like a twinkle in the eye or one day, if you like.
2020-02-20 9:58 pm
Sorry but one in one duodecillion odds are just a little too steep for me. Magic is more likely than atheistic evolution and I find magic to be preposterous.
2020-02-20 8:44 pm
Darwin believed in God, saying atheists should not use his theories for personal attacks on others, in particularly on Christians.
2020-02-20 4:03 pm
all, evolutionary theory is the backbone of chemistry and biology ... only Turkey is more likely than the United States to flat-out reject the notion ... the compatibility of Christianity and science founded by Francis Collins
2020-02-20 4:46 am
According to christian ortodox theology and christian nation there was sn t any Evolution .
Is a theory by devil .
E.g.
One cannot relate trees to bees .
Is a theory by devil .
E.g.
One cannot relate trees to bees .
2020-02-22 6:47 pm
True Christians which are very few, believe what the Word of God plainly teaches. Many Nicolaitan Christians don't believe the Word of God to be True.
Evolution is a proven Scientific FACT within any given species. For example humans are getting taller and taller, that is evolution within the human species at work.
Now people who try to use Evolution as a means to explain how all life got on this planet is pure Fiction, and not supported by ANY Scientific Data whatsoever, but is purely theoretical. A Guess. An Opinion. A Hypothesis.
Every known species on this planet, can only produce the species it comes from.
A single celled organism, will ONLY produce the same kind of organism that it is a species of.
Every known species on this planet, can only produce offspring of the SAME species. PERIOD! This is a Scientific FACT.
No Species has ever, nor ever will, create a NEW species. NOT SCIENTIFICALLY POSSIBLE. Yet the sole belief of most evolutionist is that a single celled organism was the first life, and from it, all life was created. HOG MANURE, pure Fiction.
Evolution is a proven Scientific FACT within any given species. For example humans are getting taller and taller, that is evolution within the human species at work.
Now people who try to use Evolution as a means to explain how all life got on this planet is pure Fiction, and not supported by ANY Scientific Data whatsoever, but is purely theoretical. A Guess. An Opinion. A Hypothesis.
Every known species on this planet, can only produce the species it comes from.
A single celled organism, will ONLY produce the same kind of organism that it is a species of.
Every known species on this planet, can only produce offspring of the SAME species. PERIOD! This is a Scientific FACT.
No Species has ever, nor ever will, create a NEW species. NOT SCIENTIFICALLY POSSIBLE. Yet the sole belief of most evolutionist is that a single celled organism was the first life, and from it, all life was created. HOG MANURE, pure Fiction.
2020-02-22 7:23 am
Catholics believe in evolution and make up the largest Christian denomination in the world. This means most Christians do not deny evolution.
2020-02-22 2:34 am
THINK: The largest Christian sect is the Roman Catholics. They number about 1.2 billion. The Church sponsors grammar schools, high schools, colleges, and universities all over the world. They all teach biology, not creationism. So what are the odds that "most," i.e. 50% +1 Christians deny evolution? Pretty slim. It's only a handful that are in denial..
2020-02-21 2:29 am
No! As a professed Christian I uphold the theory of Evolution - it is always taking place all around us.
參考: Evolution is part of the ongoing program of God
2020-02-20 10:07 pm
Dear Stevan, what a person refuses to admit as true will totally depend on their world-view: what they believe about existance in general.
This is not 'science vs. religion'.
This is anti-theism vs. theism.
Both sides using science like a hammer to bash others with to make their point.
In reality, what you have already decided beforehand will determine whether or not you dismiss or agree with the evidence presented.
(But if there is no ultimate truth, Stevan, all you have left are opinions; and mine would be just as valid as yours.)
Put your biases aside and consider this. Bubbles trapped in amber (fossilized sap) prove the air had 50% more oxygen pre-flood: for this reason everything lived ten times longer.
- horns
- tusks
- fangs
- reptiles
- bugs
- grasses
- and trees
.... grew huge.
We know the age of tigers by the length of their fangs. Tigers are born WITHOUT teeth. You don’t think sabre-toothed tigers were born with like that, do you? Their fangs got that big because they lived for hundreds of years, not a couple dozen like they do today.
Fossils formed when silica permeated the tissues of plants and animals. Tsunami waves engulfed plants and animals in mud. Buried under billions of tons of water for over a year, the minerals turned them into stone. The mud also compressed and became stone. Stone cannot be dated. You can't hold up a rock and decide how many times it's travelled around the sun (how we determine a year). Oxygen and hydrogen molecules bonded to form the oceans. There were no oceans before the flood.
You don’t think this tree grew through billions of years of rock do you?
Trees like this one are found all over the world, buried upright in the mud during the flood. Fish fossils are on the tops of mountains. Are you still dismissing this evidence? Why? Because you can't admit you're wrong? Seriously? A desperate and deadly decision to reject God and His offer of salvation... why? Because of your ego? Really?
This is not 'science vs. religion'.
This is anti-theism vs. theism.
Both sides using science like a hammer to bash others with to make their point.
In reality, what you have already decided beforehand will determine whether or not you dismiss or agree with the evidence presented.
(But if there is no ultimate truth, Stevan, all you have left are opinions; and mine would be just as valid as yours.)
Put your biases aside and consider this. Bubbles trapped in amber (fossilized sap) prove the air had 50% more oxygen pre-flood: for this reason everything lived ten times longer.
- horns
- tusks
- fangs
- reptiles
- bugs
- grasses
- and trees
.... grew huge.
We know the age of tigers by the length of their fangs. Tigers are born WITHOUT teeth. You don’t think sabre-toothed tigers were born with like that, do you? Their fangs got that big because they lived for hundreds of years, not a couple dozen like they do today.
Fossils formed when silica permeated the tissues of plants and animals. Tsunami waves engulfed plants and animals in mud. Buried under billions of tons of water for over a year, the minerals turned them into stone. The mud also compressed and became stone. Stone cannot be dated. You can't hold up a rock and decide how many times it's travelled around the sun (how we determine a year). Oxygen and hydrogen molecules bonded to form the oceans. There were no oceans before the flood.
You don’t think this tree grew through billions of years of rock do you?
Trees like this one are found all over the world, buried upright in the mud during the flood. Fish fossils are on the tops of mountains. Are you still dismissing this evidence? Why? Because you can't admit you're wrong? Seriously? A desperate and deadly decision to reject God and His offer of salvation... why? Because of your ego? Really?
2020-02-20 10:01 pm
I'm willing to bet that the overwhelming majority of Christians accept the Modern Scientific Theory of Evolution - at least tentatively, and don't view science as a mutually exclusive concept from their beliefs.
The only ones who seem to have a problem with it are those who take a narrow, literal interpretation of biblical creation myths - they are far fewer in number but are also far more vocal.
Attempts by creationists to repackage their superstitious nonsense as 'Intelligent Design' were pathetic, and it was quickly shown to be pseudo-scientific (at best) but people still fall for it.
Real science follows the facts where they lead, rather than attempting to make the facts fit a preexisting narrative.
The only ones who seem to have a problem with it are those who take a narrow, literal interpretation of biblical creation myths - they are far fewer in number but are also far more vocal.
Attempts by creationists to repackage their superstitious nonsense as 'Intelligent Design' were pathetic, and it was quickly shown to be pseudo-scientific (at best) but people still fall for it.
Real science follows the facts where they lead, rather than attempting to make the facts fit a preexisting narrative.
2020-02-20 7:13 pm
Yes, they do. Probably 99% of christards are retarded scientifically illiterate creationists
2020-02-20 4:52 pm
Only mentally handicapped people deny evolution.
2020-02-20 11:50 am
How did life originate? Evolutionist Professor Paul Davies admitted, “Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell.”1 Andrew Knoll, professor of biology, Harvard, said, “we don’t really know how life originated on this planet”.2 A minimal cell needs several hundred proteins. Even if every atom in the universe were an experiment with all the correct amino acids present for every possible molecular vibration in the supposed evolutionary age of the universe, not even one average-sized functional protein would form. So how did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design?
2020-02-20 9:14 am
only those who truly accept the whole word of God. Those who do not deny evolution in any capacity have abandoned their faith in Christ.
2020-02-20 6:37 am
I suppose (maybe I'm wrong) in America it is more common for christians to deny evolution because there are a strong movement of creationists organizing themselves to interfere in politics and indoctrinate people. But christians can dwell with scientific knowledge without fear of their faith being weakened by reality when they're open minded and secure.
2020-02-20 2:39 am
Most Christians believe the theories to be inacurate. Of the 11 theories i believe 1 has the most merit
2020-02-20 2:34 am
No, the whites keep telling us they evolved from monkeys. Prolly why they both have pink booties
2020-02-20 1:44 am
Some do and some don't. A person can know numerous truths by reciting the rosary every day with care and sincerity.
2020-02-20 1:04 am
Looking at the statistics, about 40% of Christians fall into the Creationist category, 40% believe in Intelligent Design (which is just creationism pretending to be evolution), and 20% accept evolution.
If you ask most Christian the question "do you deny evolution?" most would say no, but many of them couch that as ID.
If you ask most Christian the question "do you deny evolution?" most would say no, but many of them couch that as ID.
2020-02-20 12:56 am
Most Christians deny that there is a God, but attend church for social reasons. They believe in evolution because DNA proves that it is real. Even recent popes have admitted that DNA evidence and evolution is real. However, those popes also believe that there is a God that pushed the process along.
收錄日期: 2021-04-24 07:45:24
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20200219164004AAKbnRE