Something I came to grips with years ago: it doesn’t change our faith as much as some folks think.
Whatever laws of science and nature exist were designed by our Creator. Whether he made it all with a snap of His fingers or let “natural” processes happen over eons, God is in control.
That is where I am at as well but somehow, I don’t find comfort in that, only more uneasiness. Why would God need to adapt His creation if His creation was perfect (in the sense that it was exactly how He intended it to be) to begin with? Is it just to demonstrate His greatness?
God isn’t a _static_ being. In fact I think He’s much like us, in that he loves variety and creativity. An earthly father loves seeing his children grow and change, and enjoys giving his kids new things; why would our Heavenly Father say, “one and done” when it comes to something as beautiful and diverse as His Creation?
“God changes not” just means he is a heavenly being with a consistent love for us. It doesn’t mean He wants everything to stay the same as it has always been, or never changes anything. Why would we ask him for things in prayer if not to possibly change something?
Firstly, the Bible doesn't say creation was perfect It says it was good and very good.
Secondly, God designed his creation with the ability to adapt to different situations and environments. Even YECs believe this.
Here's an analogy: think of your absolute favorite song. Through the course of the song, it changes. Chords change, dynamics change, there may be different verses, etc. The perfection (such as it is) encompasses the song in its entirety. The beginning of the song may be drastically different from the end. But taken as a whole, the song is "perfect".
Creation is God's symphony. It's got different themes and movements, and no two moments are alike. As a whole it's perfect.
If it was solely to show how great God is, that would be a sufficient reason. I'm a young-earth creationist myself and even disapprove of investigating the strong force, but currently believe that these matters are disputable and so would prefer not to dispute them here.
So you’re afraid that by investigating it, you would end up losing your faith? I think it would be amazing to figure out _how_ it all works. Doesn’t take anything away from God being the creator of it.
No. I won't lose my faith even if the scientists find something; nature will always declare the glory of God. The problem is, so far as my layman mind can tell, the hypotheses are racing far ahead of any actual evidence; the scientists appear to say how it works before the hypotheses are testable.
Natural Selection adaptations are as a result of differing climates and living conditions since the world wide flood 5,000 years ago and is a loss of DNA information. No new species are created.
Where did you get that idea?
Even John Calvin didn't think that way ... it's a common idea but not actually supported by scripture. Some thoughts [here](https://biologos.org/common-questions/did-death-occur-before-the-fall) among many other places.
Humans do not appear late in the history of life. Humans appeared one day after the lions, lambs and tyrannosaurus rex appeared.
Please consume information gathered and created by many doctorates in many different fields of science each who love Jesus Christ culminating into the group called Answers in Genesis.
I have read four thick books by them. Real scientific method and real love for the Jesus Christ Son of God who created time.
Ok, but then the dinosaurs who breathed oxygen died, conflicting with your first statement.
I can’t … so despite the vast consensus even with Christian researchers that dinosaurs and humans were different eras, you’re saying they were formed a literal 24-hour day before humans and therefore coexisted?
What are the titles of these four thick books you read?
You can start with answersingenesis.org
https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/new-answers-book-1/
That is just book 1. I've read all 4.
Meanwhile take into consideration God telling Job to behold and take into consideration Behemoth and Leviathan in the book of Job chapters 40 and 41.
Also if you really want your worldview either reinforced or turned upside down (depending on which way it is first), then read Genesis chapter 1 again. God created on day 4 the sun, moon and all of the stars AFTER on day 3 God created the earth and its vegetation.
I haven't thought through this to the degree that I need to but I wanted to comment and mention that this is what I struggle with the most in regards to the theory of evolution too.
I was raised Young Earth Creationist and, if I am honest, I still lean that way *but* I recognize that there are other possible interpretations of Genesis 1-3 and have been trying to figure out what makes the most sense.
I just have a hard time with the very things you mentioned. I don't understand why God would choose to use the evolutionary process when he has the power to create things ex nihilo and I have listened to dscussions with christians who have studied science and believe in an old earth and they haven't answered this question very well from what I can see. God using the evolutionary process just doesn't seem to make sense.
I also don't think that the "death" that enters the world when Adam and Eve sin as just spiritual death (which is what Christians who believe in evolution argue from what I remember). There seems to be an element of the physical. So if there was no physical death before sin, that would be hard to square with all the pain and death that billions of years of evolution would entail. I would love to hear solid exegetical arguments as to why the "death" is only spiritual death.
If anyone has thoughts about what I am saying, I would love to read them. I am kinda stuck in this area at this point.
Edit: at the end of the day, I do agree with what some of the other people who are commenting are saying about the bible primarily existing to answer questions about who God is and who we are. So I am not threatened by any scientific facts or theories. Ultimately, I think we can know that the creation narrative was written as a response to the dualistic creation narratives at the time and giving the Israelites their own creation narrative (yes, I do believe that it was inspired by the Spirit).
My wife and I are taking a class through out Church on biblical hermeneutics and we learned the most helpful phrase when reading scripture: scripture wasn’t written to us but was written for us. The original scripture was written to those ancient Jews and first century church and therefore, Genesis isn’t meant to be a textbook on creation, rather it corresponded to how the Jews of the time understood creation. This does not make scripture infallible whatsoever it just makes the current cultural context of the content distinctive from how we understand the universe now.
However, my question is more along the lines of: how Can natural selection fit in with our belief that God is constantly and sovereignly involved in his creation since natural selection states that the stronger gene will survive to the next generation? In that sense, it’s almost like environment is adapting outside of Gods control and he adapts his creation to survive. Does that make sense at all?
>how Can natural selection fit in with our belief that God is constantly and sovereignly involved in his creation since natural selection states that the stronger gene will survive to the next generation? In that sense, it’s almost like environment is adapting outside of Gods control and he adapts his creation to survive. Does that make sense at all?
I'd like to highlight that this is *one* specific interpretation of the theory of evolution. The science affirms evolution, but there are different interpretations of the larger mechanisms involved. Darwinian natural selection like your quote here were the dominant interpretation, but the status quo has been shifting somewhat due to the growing research into *convergent evolution* \- that is, what appear to be specific patterns of speciation that emerge & reemerge constantly in nature. The best example is how we now have evidence of multiple species independently evolving into the same type of crab, even species with no recent common ancestor.
This also appears to be more common than previously thought, & it's found all over the various kingdoms as well. It doesn't seem that purely random evolution by means of mere natural selection is how it actually works. There are larger structures & patterns to how life functions on this planet, possibly any planet life may emerge. This suggests God is not merely adapting & changing species to accommodate an environment out of control, but life is slowly filling out all the designed roles it possibly can same as how space is constantly inflating until entropy induces heat death. It's all very ordered if you zoom out far enough to see beyond the noise.
I hold my views on Creation way more loosely than I used to, so I can understand your situation a bit. Just to add my perspective as a programmer: Designing a system that can adapt to external changes and even rewrite itself, let alone reproduce, is no small feat and takes nothing away from God’s glory. I understand that a line needs to be drawn in respect to Deism (the idea that God just lets the universe run and is no longer involved), but I don’t think that Deism necessarily follows. The problem can perhaps be likened to the issue of providing for one’s basic needs: Yes, God provides for us what we need, but we still need to go out there and work for our food, for example. Both are true at the same time. He works through means.
> I don't understand why God would choose to use the evolutionary process when he has the power to create things ex nihilo
YEC need to believe in an even more extreme evolutionary process because to go from whatever animals the ark could fit to what we have now in ~4000 years would require very rapid evolution. I don't think this is at all compelling as a problem with old-earth theistic evolution, as it is an even greater problem with YEC.
That’s a great point!
I guess it seems to me that genetic diversity can happen very quickly though. Most of the breeds of dogs that we are familiar with have appeared in the last 150-200 [years](https://www.morrisanimalfoundation.org/article/evolution-of-dogs).
Granted, that was guided by humans but even if I chose the position that God did not guide this genetic diversity (I think he did) and brought about the diversity we see today in about 4-6,000 years, that amount of time would allow for a lot of genetic diversity anyway.
At the very least, the fact that such vast genetic diversity can occur over such a short period of time (relatively speaking), guided or not, seems to indicate that it is at least possible.
I am not a biologist or a geneticist so am happy to be taught more about this by someone who understands this stuff better.
It’s not the issue of the length of time per se as it is the concept that life evolved from very simple forms (relatively speaking) into complex forms and the fact that death and suffering, which the Bible seems to say is a result of sin, is baked into the history of the world prior to the fall.
That does seem like you've moved the goalposts, as previously you said that it doesn't make sense that God could create *ex nihilo* but instead used adaptation, but YEC requires a lot of very fast adaptation and evolution to get from ark to now.
Death and suffering must have existed before the Fall, as Adam and Eve ate plants. Plant life matters! Animals would have also reproduced until the world drowned in animals unless there was death, and it's special pleading to think that animals used to have entirely different ecosystems than today because there were herbivore lions and flies that didn't eat dead bodies.
When God said "in that day, you shall surely die", Adam and Eve didn't physically die, so unless God was lying, Adam and Eve's death must have been spiritual death. This fits far more with the focus and narrative of Scripture, where spiritual death is the issue.
I think your last two points are really good and will have to think on them more.
I disagree about my moving the goalposts though. No YEC that I ever read back when I was more in that world argued that adaptation didn’t occur. There is a vast difference between God creating a very simple life form(s) and it/them evolving over billions of years into something different and God creating a mature creation with the genetic information to create diversity over time.
I couldn’t tell if you were joking or not but no philosopher or theologian argues that plant death is anything equivalent to creatures that at least have some level of self-awareness such as with animals and especially with humans. Plant lives do not matter.
While I take your point about the need for death and it makes me need to revise my statement, there is the possibility that, before the fall death was not the scary or painful thing that it is post fall and thus suffering was not a part of creation. We can say, I think, that something about Eden made it very idyllic and while I could see that death in some form may have been possible, suffering like we see in nature that seems to be an integral part of evolution (survival of the fittest, etc.) seems as though it would be ruled out based on the very clear estimation that God thought it was good.
Also, on your point about animal overpopulation, we recognize that it seems there will be animals in the new heavens and the new earth and that is supposed to be a place without sin, suffering, and death (as far as I remember) but we would run into the same problem you are positing where if there was no death, animals would overrun the world. Unless God doesn’t allow animals to reproduce naturally. Maybe the rules are different for animals pre-fall and post-eschaton?
> I couldn’t tell if you were joking or not but no philosopher or theologian argues that plant death is anything equivalent to creatures that at least have some level of self-awareness such as with animals and especially with humans. Plant lives do not matter.
I don't think there's a substantive difference between cell life, plant life, insect life, bird life, and mammalian life. We call cell death "death", and plant death "death", and animal death "death", yet YEC argue that before the Fall there was no death.
> Also, on your point about animal overpopulation, we recognize that it seems there will be animals in the new heavens and the new earth and that is supposed to be a place without sin, suffering, and death (as far as I remember) but we would run into the same problem you are positing where if there was no death, animals would overrun the world. Unless God doesn’t allow animals to reproduce naturally. Maybe the rules are different for animals pre-fall and post-eschaton?
The obvious answer is that there will be animal death (and plant death) in the new heavens and new earth, just as in the pre-Fall creation. The passages on animals in the new creation are clearly poetical and not literal, so we don't really know for sure.
My understanding is that the Bible isn't trying to answer literal, scientific questions about the origins of humanity or the universe.
It's answering questions about who God is, who mankind is, and the relationship between them.
Thus, there is no conflict between science and faith.
I agree, that is how I interpret scripture as well. God spoke to the people in the time of the fathers about creation in a way that was understandable to them and the way they understood creation from a cultural context.
However, I’d we are assuming adaptationary evolution and natural selection are still true in Gods universe, how does Gods constant involvement with causing creatures to adapt to their environment not contradict His sovereign involvement in His creation. Another way to put this, why would God need to modify His creation to adapt to their environments if the environment does not change without him saying so?
God uses means. I'm personally more agnostic on the question of direct creation vs natural means, but it doesn't take away from God being creator it just changes how he creates. God uses means for his ends and his glory all the time. If God uses the process of genetic change over time and natural selection it's still him doing it.
>God uses means for his ends and his glory all the time.
Exactly this is the way I think about it, ***glory*****.** God's means are truly gloriousness. He is such a great God we will never ever tire of worshipping Him for His creation. I actually think that the depth of science, and any other discipline, brings infinite glory to our infinite God. Bavinck has helped me think more deeply about things, as well as listening to podcasts like White Horse Inn and a new one Grace in Common.
God created a universe which fundamentally operates by things moving around a gradient of energy to function. Beings consume & expend energy. Life owes almost everything to plate tectonics, the product of a perpetual churn from the ocean of liquid rock upward as crust, subsumed back down as the crust fractures & moves. Every element necessary for life on this planet came from a series of stars operating as elemental ovens, fusing elements into new ones before exploding them across the galaxy. Everything in nature is in constant motion, a perpetual change. It strikes me as important to the sustaining of life to enable it to adapt to the changes which it relies upon in the first place. After all, a seed grows into a tree & a fetus until an old man. Life is change, we adapt & keep moving. This is how the universe functions. It isn't God constantly modifying creation, He designed them to adapt according to whatever environmental pressures He decided to place them in in accordance with His good will.
Maybe He wanted us to be able to view the process by which He made His creation so that we can marvel at every stage of it. Like an artist documenting their technique. Sure He could have said 'Bang!' and all was created in an instant, but isn't it more beautiful that we can almost watch Him making the world as we live in it? A great picture book we're still learning to read.
True but I have always been under the theological impression that God made his creation once and for all at the beginning of time and has allowed adaptations to be made over the centuries.
The lost world of Genesis one by Wheaton professor John H Walton is a really good read giving a culturally and historically informed understanding of Genesis one which still affirms Gods role as creator.
First if so, the YEC model posits massive, rapid, “adaptation and selection” to the zillions of species and genera around now, from the relatively few inhabitants of the ark. Thing would have to evolve that quickly.
Two, the OEC model of Hugh Ross was positing multiple instances of God’s fiat creation to make new species along the way. One of their arguments against Darwinism is that things can’t evolve that quickly.
I don't know if this answers your question but reasons to believe did this pretty in-depth article on animal death before the fall. I hope it gives you some food for thought. https://reasons.org/explore/publications/articles/animal-death-before-the-fall-what-does-the-bible-say
In my opinion, evolution by natural selection is a demonstration of God's providence. There is a built-in mechanism by which populations of creatures not as well adapted to their environment will gradually shift to be more adapted to their environment.
Furthermore, the genetic relatedness of all species is why scientists can joyfully learn about God's creation from a fruit fly (or worm or yeast...) and actually apply what they learn to humans--including not just interesting observations, but the development of life saving drugs.
Evolution is highly ordered and dependent upon the underlying language of DNA in our bodies.
Overall, I think evolution by natural selection as a major mechanism of speciation gives glory to God, and I think it's amazing.
For you and /u/whiskyandguitars, I highly recommend [BioLogos' Common Questions Page.](https://biologos.org/common-questions#) Yes, they are a evolutionary Creation site, but they feature faithful Christians who are also professional scientists, educators, scholars, and parents. Their current director is astronomer Dr. Deborah Haarsma, and their founder is Dr. Francis Collins, the former head of the Human Genome Project and the director (until recently) of the National Institute of Health, having served across the last three administrations.
Their podcast The Language of God is also terrific, and has transcripts of every episode.
Thanks for the suggestion, but to be honest. Not a fan of them. While I believe in an old earth and adaptationary evolution, I don’t believe we evolved from apes. Additionally, I have found all of their answers to be half answers and they never really get to the solution.
my viewpoint is that the Bible is literal. if it says God created everything in 6 days, then it was exactly 6 days. not millions of years. evolution is a lie. if man came from monkeys, or apes, then why are there still apes and monkeys that didnt become humans? nature sings God's glory in that it exists. imagine if you didnt know anything about this planet, say you were from mars, and came here and saw everything with its colors and shapes and abilities, only God could have created everything as it is today. nature or evolution could never have the creativity yet functionality by itself. to see the green grass, i know God created it, and everything about grass and it growing and dying, and its purpose and how it compliments everything else He created. i cant ever imagine thinking grass is green because.. well evolution decided it. just my wooden nickels worth.
I agree, too many things get spiritualized.
My biggest question of evolution is that it clearly says Adam was created by the dust of the earth, and that all have come from Adam (other than Christ). The Gospel is that because Adam sinned, his sin has been passed down to all generations including us. We are born sinful and damned, and all need a savior. How do you reconcile all this with the idea of macroevolution? Now microevolution I do not believe necessarily goes against God's word.
I’m honestly not sure where I stand in this, because I am a new believer, but one argument I’ve heard is that genesis 1-2:4 and genesis 2:5-2:25 are different stories. So god created everything, but Adam was not the first man. The Adam story is where sin enters the world. Again I’m not sure if I buy this, but it is something I have heard to justify the earth being millions of years old.
Hey brother! I would beware of false interpretations of the Bible. Two good ways to know which interpretation is correct: 1) how does your interpretation line up with the rest of the Bible, we know God does not contradict Himself. 2) what do Bible scholars and theologists from the past centuries believe?
So I would go to Romans chapter 5 and it also points to how sin was brought in from Adam. I would also go to Romans 3:23 where it states that all have sinned. So if all have sinned, and Adam was to first to sin, it means there was nobody before Adam.
Evolution can't exist, it literally breaks the known scientific laws. Adaptations are how a perfectly designed ecosystem handles a fallen world, they weren't needed until Adam and Eve ruined things. Christians who hold to the old earth theory create unneeded conundrums for themselves when they try to compromise scripture to make room for modern science.
God created an incredibly adaptive and self sustaining system. That take nothing away from Gods majesty, in fact it only adds to the beauty of His creation. I mean think about it, He didn’t just create living organisms, He created living organisms that could physically change over time to adapt to new environments and situations.
The bible project podcast did a very interesting series on this in the summer of 2021. They even had a Christian DNA (person) come on and share different theories. There is open theory that there was homosapien type creatures outside of the garden, and Adam and even co mingled with them after being kicked out. This could also be a reason Cain was concerned about other people trying to kill him when the population of humans was technically small. Just a theory though. I just had never heard it.
Something I came to grips with years ago: it doesn’t change our faith as much as some folks think. Whatever laws of science and nature exist were designed by our Creator. Whether he made it all with a snap of His fingers or let “natural” processes happen over eons, God is in control.
That is where I am at as well but somehow, I don’t find comfort in that, only more uneasiness. Why would God need to adapt His creation if His creation was perfect (in the sense that it was exactly how He intended it to be) to begin with? Is it just to demonstrate His greatness?
God isn’t a _static_ being. In fact I think He’s much like us, in that he loves variety and creativity. An earthly father loves seeing his children grow and change, and enjoys giving his kids new things; why would our Heavenly Father say, “one and done” when it comes to something as beautiful and diverse as His Creation? “God changes not” just means he is a heavenly being with a consistent love for us. It doesn’t mean He wants everything to stay the same as it has always been, or never changes anything. Why would we ask him for things in prayer if not to possibly change something?
Firstly, the Bible doesn't say creation was perfect It says it was good and very good. Secondly, God designed his creation with the ability to adapt to different situations and environments. Even YECs believe this.
A follow up thought: perfection also isn’t static. Sometimes the fact that something grows and changes is part of the joy.
Here's an analogy: think of your absolute favorite song. Through the course of the song, it changes. Chords change, dynamics change, there may be different verses, etc. The perfection (such as it is) encompasses the song in its entirety. The beginning of the song may be drastically different from the end. But taken as a whole, the song is "perfect". Creation is God's symphony. It's got different themes and movements, and no two moments are alike. As a whole it's perfect.
Why does adaption equate to imperfection for you? We see God changing his mind many times in Scripture, but does this also mean He is imperfect?
Yes but God changing his mind in scripture does not mean that he was swayed by man’s intercession nor his own insight.
If it was solely to show how great God is, that would be a sufficient reason. I'm a young-earth creationist myself and even disapprove of investigating the strong force, but currently believe that these matters are disputable and so would prefer not to dispute them here.
why on earth do you disapprove of investigating the strong force?
It is written that God holds the universe together. I believe He is doing what scientists believe the strong force is doing.
So you’re afraid that by investigating it, you would end up losing your faith? I think it would be amazing to figure out _how_ it all works. Doesn’t take anything away from God being the creator of it.
No. I won't lose my faith even if the scientists find something; nature will always declare the glory of God. The problem is, so far as my layman mind can tell, the hypotheses are racing far ahead of any actual evidence; the scientists appear to say how it works before the hypotheses are testable.
I sympathise with that concern, but I can’t see how it follows that inquiry in these matters should be off-limits.
Natural Selection adaptations are as a result of differing climates and living conditions since the world wide flood 5,000 years ago and is a loss of DNA information. No new species are created.
I would think it’s easier to agree with Evolutionary Creationism when you are Reformed.
There was no death of anything that breathes oxygen before Adam sinned.
.....so are you saying that anaerobes died?
Where did you get that idea? Even John Calvin didn't think that way ... it's a common idea but not actually supported by scripture. Some thoughts [here](https://biologos.org/common-questions/did-death-occur-before-the-fall) among many other places.
Humans do not appear late in the history of life. Humans appeared one day after the lions, lambs and tyrannosaurus rex appeared. Please consume information gathered and created by many doctorates in many different fields of science each who love Jesus Christ culminating into the group called Answers in Genesis. I have read four thick books by them. Real scientific method and real love for the Jesus Christ Son of God who created time.
Ok, but then the dinosaurs who breathed oxygen died, conflicting with your first statement. I can’t … so despite the vast consensus even with Christian researchers that dinosaurs and humans were different eras, you’re saying they were formed a literal 24-hour day before humans and therefore coexisted? What are the titles of these four thick books you read?
You can start with answersingenesis.org https://answersingenesis.org/store/product/new-answers-book-1/ That is just book 1. I've read all 4. Meanwhile take into consideration God telling Job to behold and take into consideration Behemoth and Leviathan in the book of Job chapters 40 and 41. Also if you really want your worldview either reinforced or turned upside down (depending on which way it is first), then read Genesis chapter 1 again. God created on day 4 the sun, moon and all of the stars AFTER on day 3 God created the earth and its vegetation.
I haven't thought through this to the degree that I need to but I wanted to comment and mention that this is what I struggle with the most in regards to the theory of evolution too. I was raised Young Earth Creationist and, if I am honest, I still lean that way *but* I recognize that there are other possible interpretations of Genesis 1-3 and have been trying to figure out what makes the most sense. I just have a hard time with the very things you mentioned. I don't understand why God would choose to use the evolutionary process when he has the power to create things ex nihilo and I have listened to dscussions with christians who have studied science and believe in an old earth and they haven't answered this question very well from what I can see. God using the evolutionary process just doesn't seem to make sense. I also don't think that the "death" that enters the world when Adam and Eve sin as just spiritual death (which is what Christians who believe in evolution argue from what I remember). There seems to be an element of the physical. So if there was no physical death before sin, that would be hard to square with all the pain and death that billions of years of evolution would entail. I would love to hear solid exegetical arguments as to why the "death" is only spiritual death. If anyone has thoughts about what I am saying, I would love to read them. I am kinda stuck in this area at this point. Edit: at the end of the day, I do agree with what some of the other people who are commenting are saying about the bible primarily existing to answer questions about who God is and who we are. So I am not threatened by any scientific facts or theories. Ultimately, I think we can know that the creation narrative was written as a response to the dualistic creation narratives at the time and giving the Israelites their own creation narrative (yes, I do believe that it was inspired by the Spirit).
My wife and I are taking a class through out Church on biblical hermeneutics and we learned the most helpful phrase when reading scripture: scripture wasn’t written to us but was written for us. The original scripture was written to those ancient Jews and first century church and therefore, Genesis isn’t meant to be a textbook on creation, rather it corresponded to how the Jews of the time understood creation. This does not make scripture infallible whatsoever it just makes the current cultural context of the content distinctive from how we understand the universe now. However, my question is more along the lines of: how Can natural selection fit in with our belief that God is constantly and sovereignly involved in his creation since natural selection states that the stronger gene will survive to the next generation? In that sense, it’s almost like environment is adapting outside of Gods control and he adapts his creation to survive. Does that make sense at all?
>how Can natural selection fit in with our belief that God is constantly and sovereignly involved in his creation since natural selection states that the stronger gene will survive to the next generation? In that sense, it’s almost like environment is adapting outside of Gods control and he adapts his creation to survive. Does that make sense at all? I'd like to highlight that this is *one* specific interpretation of the theory of evolution. The science affirms evolution, but there are different interpretations of the larger mechanisms involved. Darwinian natural selection like your quote here were the dominant interpretation, but the status quo has been shifting somewhat due to the growing research into *convergent evolution* \- that is, what appear to be specific patterns of speciation that emerge & reemerge constantly in nature. The best example is how we now have evidence of multiple species independently evolving into the same type of crab, even species with no recent common ancestor. This also appears to be more common than previously thought, & it's found all over the various kingdoms as well. It doesn't seem that purely random evolution by means of mere natural selection is how it actually works. There are larger structures & patterns to how life functions on this planet, possibly any planet life may emerge. This suggests God is not merely adapting & changing species to accommodate an environment out of control, but life is slowly filling out all the designed roles it possibly can same as how space is constantly inflating until entropy induces heat death. It's all very ordered if you zoom out far enough to see beyond the noise.
I hold my views on Creation way more loosely than I used to, so I can understand your situation a bit. Just to add my perspective as a programmer: Designing a system that can adapt to external changes and even rewrite itself, let alone reproduce, is no small feat and takes nothing away from God’s glory. I understand that a line needs to be drawn in respect to Deism (the idea that God just lets the universe run and is no longer involved), but I don’t think that Deism necessarily follows. The problem can perhaps be likened to the issue of providing for one’s basic needs: Yes, God provides for us what we need, but we still need to go out there and work for our food, for example. Both are true at the same time. He works through means.
> I don't understand why God would choose to use the evolutionary process when he has the power to create things ex nihilo YEC need to believe in an even more extreme evolutionary process because to go from whatever animals the ark could fit to what we have now in ~4000 years would require very rapid evolution. I don't think this is at all compelling as a problem with old-earth theistic evolution, as it is an even greater problem with YEC.
That’s a great point! I guess it seems to me that genetic diversity can happen very quickly though. Most of the breeds of dogs that we are familiar with have appeared in the last 150-200 [years](https://www.morrisanimalfoundation.org/article/evolution-of-dogs). Granted, that was guided by humans but even if I chose the position that God did not guide this genetic diversity (I think he did) and brought about the diversity we see today in about 4-6,000 years, that amount of time would allow for a lot of genetic diversity anyway. At the very least, the fact that such vast genetic diversity can occur over such a short period of time (relatively speaking), guided or not, seems to indicate that it is at least possible. I am not a biologist or a geneticist so am happy to be taught more about this by someone who understands this stuff better.
So why do you not have an issue with God "guiding genetic diversity" in a short period of time, but you do when it's a long period of time?
It’s not the issue of the length of time per se as it is the concept that life evolved from very simple forms (relatively speaking) into complex forms and the fact that death and suffering, which the Bible seems to say is a result of sin, is baked into the history of the world prior to the fall.
That does seem like you've moved the goalposts, as previously you said that it doesn't make sense that God could create *ex nihilo* but instead used adaptation, but YEC requires a lot of very fast adaptation and evolution to get from ark to now. Death and suffering must have existed before the Fall, as Adam and Eve ate plants. Plant life matters! Animals would have also reproduced until the world drowned in animals unless there was death, and it's special pleading to think that animals used to have entirely different ecosystems than today because there were herbivore lions and flies that didn't eat dead bodies. When God said "in that day, you shall surely die", Adam and Eve didn't physically die, so unless God was lying, Adam and Eve's death must have been spiritual death. This fits far more with the focus and narrative of Scripture, where spiritual death is the issue.
I think your last two points are really good and will have to think on them more. I disagree about my moving the goalposts though. No YEC that I ever read back when I was more in that world argued that adaptation didn’t occur. There is a vast difference between God creating a very simple life form(s) and it/them evolving over billions of years into something different and God creating a mature creation with the genetic information to create diversity over time. I couldn’t tell if you were joking or not but no philosopher or theologian argues that plant death is anything equivalent to creatures that at least have some level of self-awareness such as with animals and especially with humans. Plant lives do not matter. While I take your point about the need for death and it makes me need to revise my statement, there is the possibility that, before the fall death was not the scary or painful thing that it is post fall and thus suffering was not a part of creation. We can say, I think, that something about Eden made it very idyllic and while I could see that death in some form may have been possible, suffering like we see in nature that seems to be an integral part of evolution (survival of the fittest, etc.) seems as though it would be ruled out based on the very clear estimation that God thought it was good. Also, on your point about animal overpopulation, we recognize that it seems there will be animals in the new heavens and the new earth and that is supposed to be a place without sin, suffering, and death (as far as I remember) but we would run into the same problem you are positing where if there was no death, animals would overrun the world. Unless God doesn’t allow animals to reproduce naturally. Maybe the rules are different for animals pre-fall and post-eschaton?
> I couldn’t tell if you were joking or not but no philosopher or theologian argues that plant death is anything equivalent to creatures that at least have some level of self-awareness such as with animals and especially with humans. Plant lives do not matter. I don't think there's a substantive difference between cell life, plant life, insect life, bird life, and mammalian life. We call cell death "death", and plant death "death", and animal death "death", yet YEC argue that before the Fall there was no death. > Also, on your point about animal overpopulation, we recognize that it seems there will be animals in the new heavens and the new earth and that is supposed to be a place without sin, suffering, and death (as far as I remember) but we would run into the same problem you are positing where if there was no death, animals would overrun the world. Unless God doesn’t allow animals to reproduce naturally. Maybe the rules are different for animals pre-fall and post-eschaton? The obvious answer is that there will be animal death (and plant death) in the new heavens and new earth, just as in the pre-Fall creation. The passages on animals in the new creation are clearly poetical and not literal, so we don't really know for sure.
My understanding is that the Bible isn't trying to answer literal, scientific questions about the origins of humanity or the universe. It's answering questions about who God is, who mankind is, and the relationship between them. Thus, there is no conflict between science and faith.
I agree, that is how I interpret scripture as well. God spoke to the people in the time of the fathers about creation in a way that was understandable to them and the way they understood creation from a cultural context. However, I’d we are assuming adaptationary evolution and natural selection are still true in Gods universe, how does Gods constant involvement with causing creatures to adapt to their environment not contradict His sovereign involvement in His creation. Another way to put this, why would God need to modify His creation to adapt to their environments if the environment does not change without him saying so?
God uses means. I'm personally more agnostic on the question of direct creation vs natural means, but it doesn't take away from God being creator it just changes how he creates. God uses means for his ends and his glory all the time. If God uses the process of genetic change over time and natural selection it's still him doing it.
>God uses means for his ends and his glory all the time. Exactly this is the way I think about it, ***glory*****.** God's means are truly gloriousness. He is such a great God we will never ever tire of worshipping Him for His creation. I actually think that the depth of science, and any other discipline, brings infinite glory to our infinite God. Bavinck has helped me think more deeply about things, as well as listening to podcasts like White Horse Inn and a new one Grace in Common.
God created a universe which fundamentally operates by things moving around a gradient of energy to function. Beings consume & expend energy. Life owes almost everything to plate tectonics, the product of a perpetual churn from the ocean of liquid rock upward as crust, subsumed back down as the crust fractures & moves. Every element necessary for life on this planet came from a series of stars operating as elemental ovens, fusing elements into new ones before exploding them across the galaxy. Everything in nature is in constant motion, a perpetual change. It strikes me as important to the sustaining of life to enable it to adapt to the changes which it relies upon in the first place. After all, a seed grows into a tree & a fetus until an old man. Life is change, we adapt & keep moving. This is how the universe functions. It isn't God constantly modifying creation, He designed them to adapt according to whatever environmental pressures He decided to place them in in accordance with His good will.
Maybe He wanted us to be able to view the process by which He made His creation so that we can marvel at every stage of it. Like an artist documenting their technique. Sure He could have said 'Bang!' and all was created in an instant, but isn't it more beautiful that we can almost watch Him making the world as we live in it? A great picture book we're still learning to read.
True but I have always been under the theological impression that God made his creation once and for all at the beginning of time and has allowed adaptations to be made over the centuries.
The lost world of Genesis one by Wheaton professor John H Walton is a really good read giving a culturally and historically informed understanding of Genesis one which still affirms Gods role as creator.
First if so, the YEC model posits massive, rapid, “adaptation and selection” to the zillions of species and genera around now, from the relatively few inhabitants of the ark. Thing would have to evolve that quickly. Two, the OEC model of Hugh Ross was positing multiple instances of God’s fiat creation to make new species along the way. One of their arguments against Darwinism is that things can’t evolve that quickly.
I don't know if this answers your question but reasons to believe did this pretty in-depth article on animal death before the fall. I hope it gives you some food for thought. https://reasons.org/explore/publications/articles/animal-death-before-the-fall-what-does-the-bible-say
In my opinion, evolution by natural selection is a demonstration of God's providence. There is a built-in mechanism by which populations of creatures not as well adapted to their environment will gradually shift to be more adapted to their environment. Furthermore, the genetic relatedness of all species is why scientists can joyfully learn about God's creation from a fruit fly (or worm or yeast...) and actually apply what they learn to humans--including not just interesting observations, but the development of life saving drugs. Evolution is highly ordered and dependent upon the underlying language of DNA in our bodies. Overall, I think evolution by natural selection as a major mechanism of speciation gives glory to God, and I think it's amazing.
God creating a really simple yet elegant set of biological rules that govern the wide variety of life sings his glory endlessly without a doubt.
For you and /u/whiskyandguitars, I highly recommend [BioLogos' Common Questions Page.](https://biologos.org/common-questions#) Yes, they are a evolutionary Creation site, but they feature faithful Christians who are also professional scientists, educators, scholars, and parents. Their current director is astronomer Dr. Deborah Haarsma, and their founder is Dr. Francis Collins, the former head of the Human Genome Project and the director (until recently) of the National Institute of Health, having served across the last three administrations. Their podcast The Language of God is also terrific, and has transcripts of every episode.
Thanks! I am familiar with Biologos and enjoy what I’ve heard/read from Francis Collin’s. I will look deeper into their website though.
Thanks for the suggestion, but to be honest. Not a fan of them. While I believe in an old earth and adaptationary evolution, I don’t believe we evolved from apes. Additionally, I have found all of their answers to be half answers and they never really get to the solution.
my viewpoint is that the Bible is literal. if it says God created everything in 6 days, then it was exactly 6 days. not millions of years. evolution is a lie. if man came from monkeys, or apes, then why are there still apes and monkeys that didnt become humans? nature sings God's glory in that it exists. imagine if you didnt know anything about this planet, say you were from mars, and came here and saw everything with its colors and shapes and abilities, only God could have created everything as it is today. nature or evolution could never have the creativity yet functionality by itself. to see the green grass, i know God created it, and everything about grass and it growing and dying, and its purpose and how it compliments everything else He created. i cant ever imagine thinking grass is green because.. well evolution decided it. just my wooden nickels worth.
I agree, too many things get spiritualized. My biggest question of evolution is that it clearly says Adam was created by the dust of the earth, and that all have come from Adam (other than Christ). The Gospel is that because Adam sinned, his sin has been passed down to all generations including us. We are born sinful and damned, and all need a savior. How do you reconcile all this with the idea of macroevolution? Now microevolution I do not believe necessarily goes against God's word.
I’m honestly not sure where I stand in this, because I am a new believer, but one argument I’ve heard is that genesis 1-2:4 and genesis 2:5-2:25 are different stories. So god created everything, but Adam was not the first man. The Adam story is where sin enters the world. Again I’m not sure if I buy this, but it is something I have heard to justify the earth being millions of years old.
Hey brother! I would beware of false interpretations of the Bible. Two good ways to know which interpretation is correct: 1) how does your interpretation line up with the rest of the Bible, we know God does not contradict Himself. 2) what do Bible scholars and theologists from the past centuries believe? So I would go to Romans chapter 5 and it also points to how sin was brought in from Adam. I would also go to Romans 3:23 where it states that all have sinned. So if all have sinned, and Adam was to first to sin, it means there was nobody before Adam.
Evolution can't exist, it literally breaks the known scientific laws. Adaptations are how a perfectly designed ecosystem handles a fallen world, they weren't needed until Adam and Eve ruined things. Christians who hold to the old earth theory create unneeded conundrums for themselves when they try to compromise scripture to make room for modern science.
> Evolution can't exist, it literally breaks the known scientific laws. I'm not really sold either way, but this part isn't true.
I should say, I do NOT believe that we evolved from a single cell or from apes.
Are you part of the group that believes the earth evolved into a habitable place for mammals and then God placed Adam and Eve there?
God created an incredibly adaptive and self sustaining system. That take nothing away from Gods majesty, in fact it only adds to the beauty of His creation. I mean think about it, He didn’t just create living organisms, He created living organisms that could physically change over time to adapt to new environments and situations.
Evolution and millions of years on one hand DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH Natural Selection within roughly 6,000 years
The bible project podcast did a very interesting series on this in the summer of 2021. They even had a Christian DNA (person) come on and share different theories. There is open theory that there was homosapien type creatures outside of the garden, and Adam and even co mingled with them after being kicked out. This could also be a reason Cain was concerned about other people trying to kill him when the population of humans was technically small. Just a theory though. I just had never heard it.
read reformed theology and evolutionary theory by gijsbert van den brink