Can You Think Evolution Is True And Believe In God?

Aug 22, 2011 1 Comment by

This question partially depends on one’s definition of a god, but is more effected by other beliefs and doctrine that one holds.

Let’s consider a single god, who is simply a god of the gaps, whose purpose is to create the universe and possibly have some interaction with it as well. With this definition, the notions of evolution and faith are completely compatible. So far we have come across no contradictions. So far we haven’t even come close to contradictions, such that one could easily think that these two notions are irrelevant with respect to each other.

Unfortunately for our above consideration, it is uncommon to find someone who only uses a god to answer questions that seem to be unanswerable, or at least stupendously difficult to answer. Religion tends to be used for more than that. Gods frequently have much more involvement in the creation of the universe or humanity.

In order to find at what point contradictions will occur, let’s turn to our definition of evolution. The theory of evolution only describes how lifeforms change over time, it does not attempt to describe how they started. With knowledge of this definition, one could incorporate the intervention of a god into many aspects of the universe whilst still considering evolution to be true. One could propose that a god created the earth several billion years ago, with the seeds of life sewn into it, and with the intention of letting evolution do the rest, and this notion is clearly compatible with evolution. One could suggest a god as having any degree of intervention in the universe, but in order to also accept evolution as true, the only requirement is that your god does not do something which directly contradicts it.

There is one infamous religious streak which does this, creationism, or more specifically the young-earth creationists. The theory of evolution brings with it a required age range for the earth, because in order to achieve the complexity of lifeforms that we observe, evolution must have been working away for an unimaginably long time. So a creationist generally cannot, although more often simply does not, consider evolution to be a fact. For the rest of us, the notions are generally compatible.

But there’s still something that hasn’t been explored here. This question is astoundingly popular, yet it seems that for the majority it need not be an important question at all. The compatibility of evolution and faith seems to subtly represent the compatibility of all of science and faith. This leads to a very different question. The theories that surround the big bang and many other unusual phenomena or laws in the universe also contend some of the capabilities of a god.

Questions and Answers

About the author

The author didnt add any Information to his profile yet

One Response to “Can You Think Evolution Is True And Believe In God?”

  1. Dushun says:

    Hey Peter, well said… The answer is no. Mainly because man did not evolve nor did the creation of the heaven and the earth. With all due respect, it’s not a matter of a difinition of God but rather in truth what we as man believe a God to have made. Here is a point you might find interesting regarding the origin of the universe and a firmament. If so, please follow up to the site. I’m presuming you are familiar with the controversy regarding the firmament, if not, that will be the point, we all know about the creation of the universe but the firmament is an apparant mystery in this matter mentioned eight times in the account alone… Peter, If and only if the ancient writings of genesis 1 is the lone origin of the entire dispute then, A firmament is the resolve to this dispute: Regardless of ‘how’ the universe became; whether it evolved or whether a God created it; Either way, it only evolved as far as a formless and void mass of rock, suspended in space, covered entirely in water and furthermore in a state or condition that was impossible to sustain life as we know it here to date, therefore rendering our history nonexistent… Let’s consider that implication;

    Our planet, ‘He called earth’ was in a formless and void state with water all over it, when the documented record of the account takes place, which we hold to be the words of God, the foundation of our faith, it is also the lone source of the entire dispute vs. the world.

    The true question is; what do we believe God to have made? If it is the universe, then the planet is still formless and void under water and thus our history never became, for there was no dry. Nor is there any account documented to testify anything prior to that void condition…

    So question, what are we as man believing ‘God’ to have made, Vs. What the testament of God’s word says He made? His word proclaims He ‘made’ a firmament to divide the waters,,, which in turn, created a space between now two waters, above and under, then called the space between the two ‘heaven’ and now also subsequent to this divide God made,,, waters on the planet can be gathered together unto one place, and the ‘dry’ can appear He called earth and furthermore this divide or firmament allows for everything else to occur chronologically in the account… The firmament declares His creation of the heaven and the earth. The universe does not, according to the source of the dispute.

    Now, other than being diverted into the vast abysmal darkness of confusion and speculation of the universe to uphold and defend, the crux of our subsequent dilemma is that we are left with a blind spot enabling us to clearly see the visible verification of the creation account as testified by that very God’s word…

    What if man could see His verified truth? Is where my hope lies.

    Our blind spot is the opening vision of our planet not known by name as of yet, with water all over it… Now if you can see the planet covered in water suspended in space, and that’s all we have? When God divides the waters from the waters we are left with only one scenario of what that could look like. See the planet covered in water, as God divides half of the waters or so above the planet, and the waters on the planet gather together to one place, where ever that might be, then at some point all the water above floods back to the planet, would that not recover the planet back to its original void state? Or the divided waters above the firmament remain above the waters under it. Then our current alleged mystery is; where are the waters above? That being understood should be clearly seen but are clearly not? We have no identified location for the displacement of the waters, on the earth or above it, in this scenario…

    Our blind spot is in this question; when we see the planet in space covered in water, other than the water, what does the planet have in common with any other planet we know of?

    Your only answer should be; it’s round… It’s round or spherical with water all over it… What form would you say then, any planet we know of is in? Again its form is round…

    Well, according to the documented testament of ‘God’s’ account, this planet was WITHOUT form, covered entirely with H2o… I wonder what that might look like, a PLANET, without form, covered in water…

    I pray your interest is sparked. To clearly see the resolve of the firmament in truth and in more specific detail that will clear up all inquiry to this proclamation, I ask that you go to; and if you find it to be revealing which I pray you will, you might share it with your peers… Just take your time and it will reveal itself to you, for only ‘truth’ can…
    Continue to love your family,