The theological implications of the Theory of Evolution

[Josh Newmaster]

As the world continues to go in an “interesting” direction regarding the
nature of origins I thought I would pose a survey/questionnaire regarding
your impressions on the theory of evolution within a Christian worldview.

Before this discussion gets out of control, I would like to be very
precise on what I’m asking and to present as much clarity and honesty to
the issue as possible.

Part I

When I say the theory of evolution I mean, “The descent with
modification of all living things from a common ancestor.” In other
words, human beings (as we presently are) have developed or been
“modified” from a previous species of organism. Therefore in this
definition of the theory of evolution, I include both micro and macro
evolution.

Please notice, I have said NO WHERE that this demands a purely
materialistic cause for these “modifications”, nor have I said anything
to the origin of where the first organism (or collection of cells,
proteins, elements, etc) came from.

Part II

That being said, I have heard many objections to theory of evolution on
theological grounds. This is the focus of our discussion; I have NO
interest (at this time) in discussing the scientific arguments for or
against the theory. I am solely interested in the theological
implications of the theory of evolution within Christianity.

Part III

Therefore I have organized (what I believe to be) the top 6 objections.
In no particular order they are as followed:

1. Issue of authority: The theory of evolution speaks differently about
creation described in the Bible. Therefore it must be rejected because
if we accept it we have to discard inerrancy or the inspiration of
scripture.
2. Conflicted Creation: The issue of creation “ex nihilo” and the
differences between the biblical creation timeline and the theory of
evolution’s timeline.
3. Relinquished Relationships: Are the proclamations made in the early
chapters of Genesis dissolved by the theory of evolution?
4. Fictional Fall: Does the theory of evolution negate the doctrine of
Original Sin and a literal Fall of mankind, thereby making Christ’s
sacrifice meaningless?
5. Good, but not good enough: Does the theory of evolutions cycles of
“life and death” represent the “good and very good” creation described
in Genesis? Thus was death/suffering existent in the world before the
Fall of man?
6. Imago Dei’s Destruction: Does the theory of evolution destroy the
doctrine of Imago Dei?


Conclusion

As I have said before, my goal is not to discuss the scientific
merits/demerits of the theory of evolution. Rather, my goal is to
receive and hear your feedback/responses on these 6 “objections”, and to
see if you agree that the theory of evolution does demand that these
issues be accepted if we accept the theory.

I am curious to hear your responses.

Your brother in Christ,

-Josh

[JL Vaughn]

Josh,

I personally reject evolution on scientific grounds. These examples you give of theological grounds are based in modernism and are not problems with the historic, pre-modern Christian faith.

1) Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation ...
And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures ...
And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures ...

Until Pasteur, well after Darwin, the church believed that God never rescinded these comands and that a biogenesis and continued evolution were what these commands required.

2) Creation ex nihilo is a relatively new concept ((less than 500 years old) and was never seen in Scripture before.

3) No, they are required by the church's historical assumption of evolution.

4) It deny's the modern concept of a physical fall that created physical death. Historically, the church assumed that Adam needed food to live and therefore was not created immortal but subject to phyical death.

5) Our concept of "good" and "very good" is warped by modern concerns.

6) No, the Hebrew word "bara" essentially means "cut." "Dust of the earth" is used several times to describe people. So Adam was "cut" or "separated" from the "dust of the earth," could be very different from what we generally believe and understand.

Blessings,

JL Vaughn

[Jack]

JL;
Pasteur was born 13 years after Darwin, and died 13 years after Darwin.
Pasteur was a professor if Physics, by 1848.
Origin of the Species was published in 1859.
In what sense, was" Pasteur well after Darwin"?
Jack

[JL Vaughn]

Pasteur's famous experiments were done after Darwin's, The Origin of Species, had changed the paradigm. Pasteur's experiments were too little, too late, to change the entire mindset.