A question for Christians who accept evolution.

[Minimalist]

Have fun. I'm in NY now and I hate typing on this shitty lap top!

[annatar]

Jesus has to be around because of that, if it is fact. We need help > help is provided.

we need help indeed. and where is jeusus now? africa?? his help only covers his fault not ours. He created us fallible or sinful. so it is not our fault at all. and he could help sick people right now we have many.. he could stop wars or feed people. but instead he just clear our guilts which were happened becouse of him..

[Rev. Rye]

Ok, but what guilt do we have? I haven't done anything wrong. Are you talking about the "sins" of my ancestors here?

Not your ancestors, no. You. Your nature is 'sinful' or fallible. You can't help but follow your nature which sometimes will lead you to do stuff that when in your good upstanding citizen mode you would regret.

So, if man has a sinful nature, and God created man, this basically means that God created man to have an inherent major flaw.

And even if there is something to the logic of a blood sacrifice actually helping to cure it, it effectively means that God spent 4000 years at the very least (since you're not a biblical literalist, I'm almost certain that you believe the time was much longer) knowing that there was something inherently wrong in his design of man and apparently not bothering or unable to do anything about it. I mean, it took eight years for the Ford Motor Company to own up to the fact that there was something wrong with their Pintos and decided to issue a recall to nip their problem in the bud for once and for all. And yet, almost 2000 years after the death of Jesus, human beings still have sinful natures.

[Edwardo Piet]

Who needs Jesus to forgive them?

Why not be forgiven by yourself or someone you love?

Besides, if you've done something terribly wrong you fucking should feel guilty and you shouldn't relieve yourself of such a feeling that is there to remind you of your moral responsibility on the behalf of some man who supposedly died on a cross about 2000 and something fucking years ago.

[KichigaiNeko]

Ok, but what guilt do we have? I haven't done anything wrong. Are you talking about the "sins" of my ancestors here?

Not your ancestors, no. You. Your nature is 'sinful' or fallible. You can't help but follow your nature which sometimes will lead you to do stuff that when in your good upstanding citizen mode you would regret.

So, if man has a sinful nature, and God created man, this basically means that God created man to have an inherent major flaw.

I personally like the bit that 'we are created In HIS IMAGE' warts and all with all the major flaws in place??

[solja247]

DeistPaladin mentioned something that I'd never really thought of before concerning Christianity and evolution.

Essentially, evolution means that there was no Adam & Eve, which means there was no fall, which means there was no need for Jesus.

I'm just wondering how Christian "evolutionists" explain their faith in light of this. What was the point of Jesus if there was no fall? Or, if there was a fall, when (and why) did it happen?

Christians who accept evolution as the best theory to understand how the world was created. Live on a slippery slop. What you argue here is the slippery slope fallacy, remove creation you have no sin entering the world, have no sin you have no Jesus, Have no Jesus you have no Christianity.

But what if you are looking at it wrong?

What if the battle between 'good' and 'evil' is bigger than over a piece of fruit? I mean the whole story is full of holes, theologically and morally speaking, the woman is blamed, not both them (just to name one). Anyways what if the controversy was bigger? This is what I believe happens when rejecting Genesis 1 and 2 as being literal, only makes the controversy bigger. Sure we dont know how it all started, but should we expect something so complicated written in a book written by primitive people?

[ABierman1986]

If it's the answer and the word of God then we should absolutely expect the accurate truth and nothing else. This not being the case is difficult to get around for accepting any of the bible.

[Zen Badger]

The real problem for religion regarding Evolution is that a universe billions of years old implies an impersonal creator.

Afterall it's hard to have a personal relationship with an entity that can only ever perceive you as a brief flash of being, if at all.

[solja247]

The real problem for religion regarding Evolution is that a universe billions of years old implies an impersonal creator.

Afterall it's hard to have a personal relationship with an entity that can only ever perceive you as a brief flash of being, if at all.

How so?

Perhaps your understanding of God is limited.

[The Omnissiunt One]

Another problem for Christians who accept evolution is that it intensifies the problem of evil, and also weakens any inference from the world to design. Why would a loving god choose a means of creation that entailed billions of years of suffering and death? Isn't that a cruel and inefficient way of doing it? Also, as I say, evolution suggests that the appearance of design can be created through naturalistic means, and ultimately suggests that our existence is the result of randomness. Anything else, like the claim that God oversees evolution, is unnecessary supposition, and has no basis in the facts of our universe.