• This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.

Why are Christians embracing Evolution?


Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
Hall of Fame
Biblically: in the beginning God created the "heavens" - God said let there be "light" Genesis 1:3 the first day
Scientifically: according to Einstein before the big bang there was "nothing" - the big bang singularity occurred and there was a burst of "light" ...

You are not justified in listing supposed similarities and not assessing the dramatic differences.

The big bang requires billions of years to help disguise its fatal flaws. The Bible says "six days."

If you're going to advocate the idea that "six days" might not mean what it plainly says, you're going to have to provide compelling evidence.

At no time did I say science was correct.

I'm making a semantic point in response to this statement for a good reason. Science is a process of throwing out untenable ideas. Your statement implies that some group — ie, Darwinists — has a controlling stake in what science is.


Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
This is a very old thread but maybe someone will read it.

God called the Earth to bring forth plants and greenery.
God called the waters to bring fourth fish and life in the waters.
God called the Earth to bring forth beast and cattle on the land.
Anyone ever notice that God called the earth and the waters to bring forth life.

No one knows the process God used. And because evolution and creation does coincide with each other: first the heavens (big bang) - then the Earth - then the plants - then marine life - then land animals - lastly man. The only difference is in science says this sun was first, in scripture the sun was created on the 4th day. Scientifically, the Earth and the sun are roughly the same age a billion years apart by their estimation. That is probably a reason why some Christians think God use the process of evolution at least in all life on earth except man.
Rebel's reaction to my post simply baffles me and so I went back and reread this trying to figure out whether I had missed something. It reads the same to me today as it did the first time I read it. I see no way to interpret it other than that Rebel thinks that a marriage between biblical creation and atheistic "science" is possible or at the very least, he thinks its understandable why someone might think so. To which, I say that anyone who thinks such a thing isn't a Christian and might as well throw their bible in a swamp hoping that some microbe might eat it and evolve into something other than a microbe. Even that doesn't really do justice to how far removed such a person would be from reality. It just simply cannot be done without someone lying about something.

Even what Rebel states about evolution and creation coinciding with each other is false...

...because evolution and creation does coincide with each other: first the heavens (big bang) - then the Earth - then the plants - then marine life - then land animals - lastly man.

God made the Earth on day one and then the Sun and stars on day four.

God not only created the Earth before the Sun and stars, He created it before He created light!

Genesis records land plants (including seeded plants and trees) being created BEFORE sea creatures.

And that just scratches the surface. There just isn't any way to reconcile the biblical record with evolution - period.



This space intentionally left blank
Anyone ever notice that God called the earth and the waters to bring forth life.
And that's supposed to support Darwinism how, exactly? How is that supposed to agree with the farce called "universal common ancestry"? Wouldn't you kind of need the waters, alone, to bring forth ALL life.....even all the life that Moses tells us the earth brought forth?


Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Darwinism cannot be presented any other way.

They say it themselves: Evolutionists are forced to use a "creationist shorthand" to be part of a comprehensible conversation.

"That is a kind of irrationality that is essential to high-quality work."
LOL, you're right. I guess it could be clarified that the comic nature of different presentations defending common descent is on a sliding scale, with the video from UN being on the "more comical" end of the scale.


Well-known member
The questions may be asked, why do many confessed Christians not see a conflict between the work of a Creator God and evolution? Why are they embracing evolution without a second thought?
1. Because we respect the truth, even if it challenge what we wish were the case
2. Because metaphor can be used to communicate important truths.


"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
The Bible leaves no room for evolution.
Nor does any physical evidence, properly understood.

There was one gigantic extinction event, the Flood.

There was one cause of the different geological strata with different creatures characteristically fossilizing in them, also the Flood.

There's zero physical proof of any DNA type changing into another DNA type.

The only evidence that all by itself leaves room for the notion of evolution is the obvious family resemblance between all of life, namely DNA. But when you take away the fanciful ideas that there were multiple gigantic extinction events and extremely old layers of rock formed, there's no reason outside of abject atheism to invent evolution.

The reason why Christians embrace evolution is because they do not understand this.