Are Evolution and Christianity Completely Incompatible?

[Spooky]

Not sure, but I doubt it.

[SamS]

I've heard people say that the early Church believed in a non-literal Genesis, and that the literal interpretation began just a few centuries ago. Not sure where that comes from...

Just for information's sake: <snip, snip>

Has anyone heard of the Gap Theory? Seems like it has actual Scriptural credibility. It's basically the idea that the Bible teaches an old earth and a young human race (but, still against evolution). I don't see a way to get human evolution into the Bible.

[Aoi Magi]

Unless the 'metaphorical' understanding claims 'Adam' to be the name of a unicellular organism I don't see how they can shoe-horn evolution in there, but then again, the theistic mental gymnastics is capable of achieving greater feats. With enough faith I am sure one can find the entire theory of evolution to have been already written in there somewhere.

[ignoramus]

It's the weapon vs shield argument.
As soon as science discovers something new, Religion will do the gymnastics to compensate for it.

My favourite is: young earth creatard: "God put the dino bones in the ground and make them look old ...."

[robvalue]

Edit: whoops, read the question properly rob!

In real terms, yes they are incompatible. What most Christians profess to believe has no correlation to reality, and amounts to unfounded and unnecessary extra assumptions, even if they accept evolution.

For example, "I believe in evolution but God made/guided evolution". It's just a meaningless phrase that tries to shoe-horn God into explanations that no longer need it. Trying to explain how original sin fits into evolution is nothing short of cringeworthy.

But since people are great at believing two contradictory things at once, they can coexist in the mind of the Christian.

[Aoi Magi]

It's the weapon vs shield argument.
As soon as science discovers something new, Religion will do the gymnastics to compensate for it.

My favourite is:  young earth creatard: "God put the dino bones in the ground and make them look old ...."

The devil had a party and threw the bones under the ground (cause hell is supposed to be down there somewhere).


I wish the theists would use a bit better arguments though, like why not argue if "the london hammer" can seem like a few hundred million year old fossil, what is the validity of others? at least rebutting these would be a bit more fun... sigh!

[Aaran]

If you take 'god' to mean a vague creative entity or force, then not necessarily. If however you're referring to the Biblical representation of Jehovah (the omnipotent and omnibenevolent) then I think evolution by natural selection pretty much disproves the existence of such a character.

I can't see why a God who is supposedly omnipotent would subject himself to the gratuitous trouble of instigating the process of evolution on Earth and presiding over it for millions of years with the intention that its ultimate product would be homo sapiens, when, if the fictional accounts of his potency are to be believed, he could have simply willed humankind into being instantaneously.

And considering just how violent and sanguinary the process of evolution by natural selection is, I find it difficult to believe that God could be particularly magnanimous either. Most wild animals live in a constant state of fear and apprehension, and usually die frightened and in pain. Well over 99% of all species that have ever existed have gone extinct. This protracted mass murder couldn't possibly be the handiwork of a benevolent God who loves all his creatures, only a very capricious and very wasteful one.

[Alex K]

Bullshit.

The bible could have said: "The universe as we know it started 13.x billion years ago, the earth and the sun formed 4.x billion years ago, humans evolved such and such. Oh, and wash your hands, don't keep slaves and guys be nice to your women."

Why the fuck doesn't it?

If you need to work up theories how you might have to interpret through layers of metaphors what the damn book says about the age of the universe, it doesn't say it, period.

[ignoramus]

For some reason, all these mental gymnastics keep reminding me of:

The ship of Theseus, also known as Theseus' paradox, is a thought experiment that raises the question of whether an object which has had all of its components replaced remains fundamentally the same object. Many will know it as as "Grandfather's Axe".

EG: Grandad has his favourite axe, over the years, he's changed the head on it and the handle several times, but it's still his favourite axe! To me, this is how all religious people are. The bible, in its modern digestible form, has been "metaphoricised" (is that even a word) to the point where the original literal text is ignored.

So the question is: Why would someone knowingly put their faith in something supposedly the "word" of God, but having all the words twisted to mean something else.
Where is the authenticity? Maybe the "actual" word of God is not "actually" God's word? Therefore, negotiable...
As CL said, the bible itself is not the number 1 tool of religion. The church is. Why do I always end up in the same dead end. Namely, follow the money and you'll end up at the thief's door ...The Vatican.

[Anomalocaris]

Christianity is potentially compatible with anything.
It's one of the benefits of making sh*t up, as one goes along.

Which would be contemptible, but not all that dangerous.

What makes christianity dangerous and utterly irredeemable even in its pretense to be some crass allegorical tool is the fact it is also easily made incompatible with anything, depending on the biases and agenda of the ones making it up as they go to lead the sheets around.