Evolution is compatible with belief in God.

[micatala]

Some creationists consistently maintain that accepting evolutionary common descent, including the descent of humans from earlier species of primates, means one cannot accept God or any other supernatural being or creative events. My own view is that one can accept the fact of evolution and still believe in a creator God.

An example is the following quote from the Evolutionist Discrimination in Public Schools thread.

. . . . . the question becomes inverted to ask which racial group denies it's origin and descent from a supernatural Being and insists instead, on asserting that all racial varieties of human beings in America descended from African ancestors?

The questions for debate are:

1. On what basis can one conclude from the biological theory of evolution that there is no God?

2. Is the idea that God created the universe and/or life within the universe the same as saying that life descended from God? THis is sort of a new one on me, as I don't know that creationists commonly assert 'biological descent' from God, but rather that God created humans and all life as a one-time event.

By 'biological evolution,' I do not include abiogenesis, although I am not averse to restating question 1 to include that, say as question 1a.

1a. On what basis can we conclude from the assumption that life arose from non-life that there is no God?

[Cathar1950]

My answer to #1 is:
I can't think of any reason to not believe in God do to evolutionary theory.
#2:I would say all of life maybe even emanates from God and all reality is a part of God. I do not believe that God(any concept) can be separate from from the universe. Which makes me wonder how super natural really is. Maybe it is all supernatural including the universe. I am trying not to be dualistic.
#3: No reason, If we can hold the assumption that life arose from non-life we could also assume that God arose from the same source.

For me if there is a God evolution makes perfect sense. I sense we are all adding to God's consequent or contingent nature this includes the universe. Maybe God is as much creature as creator. I am not a biblicist and therefor I have no problem with the stories and can enjoy them for what they are non-science, Some quasi-history and the soul(whole person) searching for answers in community and myth for self awareness and growth. God is not just for comfort but also to extend our reach.
I don't sound preachy do I?

[McCulloch]

The questions for debate are:
1. On what basis can one conclude from the biological theory of evolution that there is no God?

If your god has stated unambiguously that he has created life in a specific way and in a specific time-frame, then quite possibly the theory of evolution would prove your god in error, therefore not in existence. For instance, a Norse creation myth includes, "While walking along the sea shore the sons of Bar found two trees, and from them they created a man and a woman." For a Norse literalist, the theory of evolution and basic genetics which link the origins of our species with other primates nullifies the idea that humans were created from trees and thus nullifies the literal interpretation of the myth and the literal existence of the sons of Bar.

[juliod]

If your god has stated unambiguously that he has created life in a specific way and in a specific time-frame, then quite possibly the theory of evolution would prove your god in error, therefore not in existence.

This is correct. Religion and evolution are only compatible for those theists who reject their own doctrine. All the major religions (and most minor ones) have discrete creation myths. Only liberal non-religions like the Unitarian Universalists have a sufficient lack of doctrine to accept evolution in good faith (pun).

DanZ

[micatala]

Hmmm. It is early in the thread, but so far no response from creationists. Let's hope this changes.

This is correct. Religion and evolution are only compatible for those theists who reject their own doctrine.

Uhhh. This is making some big assumptions about what people hold as their own religious views. It seems to me you are pigeon-holing religious doctrine, although I don't want to jump to conclusions on how you are defining what counts as religious doctrine. I would suggest each individual be allowed to define their own doctrines.

Obviously, we can group believers to some extent, but we should not ascribe all believers to certain subgroups that hold particular views.

[juliod]

It is early in the thread, but so far no response from creationists. Let's hope this changes.

I was going to add to my reply that I don't expect creationists to take up this subject. They never do. It cuts to close to home for them. To fundementalists, evolution is a test for apostacy. It's not about science, or truth, or even doctrine, to these people. It's a test to see if you are a "good christian". The question can't even be entertained.

I would suggest each individual be allowed to define their own doctrines.

Well, if everyone can define their own then it isn't really doctrine, is it? Doctrine implies the existance of an authority, or at least an organization. Most people belong to an organized church, and the organization has a doctrine of one sort or another. Christian doctrin inherently rests with the bible. If you don't believe in what the bible says, why be a christian?

It's more problematical than most people admit. Jesus and his teachings come to us only from the New Testement. The claim that Jesus is divine, and that his teachings are true, is based on the supposed fulfillment by Jesus of sundry Old Testement prophesies. These prophesies are meaningful because the Old Testement is the "word of god" and therefore of profound significance, not to say, innerrancy.

If the OT is not taken as literally true, then the prophesies it contains are bogus. Then the claim that Jesus fulfills these prophesies is spurious at best. Jesus becomes, then, at most a minor judaic cult leader.

DanZ

[Cathar1950]

I did take this test on beliefnet and I found that I was a liberal Jew, liberal unitarian or a liberal neo-pagan. This might be do to my aversion to doctrines, dogma and creeds. They are fine for children and within limits, community along with the all the myths and metaphors. But you grow up. I wanted my kids to behave(within reason) and listen to what they are told(within reason) when they were young. But I would not want them to stay that way because of me. They need to think and value for themselves. That is the beauty of life as well as the responsiblity. I could not deprive them of that joy. I would think God is bigger and better then me at least as an ideal. Yet I know it is always a limited ideal related to experience. reason and hope.
We evolve as people, and we grow. What most don't seem to know or understand is that their religion has also evolved and like biological or cultural evolution is not always a ladder to the top, where I am of course. That the concepts of God have responded and evolved do to other cultures is obvious to even the smallest minds. One casual reading of the Bible makes this obvious except to those who are mentally and/or emotionally challenged.
Maybe some believe God never changes. I think usually the context of that is related to his love or promises as they are believed by people. But a God that never changes would be a God that is unrelated to anything and therefor meaningless to us. A God outside of time and the universe is even more meaningless. God I would thin is not immutable people some times are but a God with this attribute would be less powerful then a grain of sand and unworthy of worship, admiration, or trust.

[Chad]

There's one issue that I thought of. In light of the theory of evolution we have found out that species evolve according to evolutionary pressures. Evolution is not predetermined. We are humans because of the non-random process that natural selection took in response to our environment over millions of years. I feel this at least rules out that a God would have intended to make humans, or that we are at all "special" as compared to other animals. For example, lets imagine for a minute that dinosaurs never went extinct. I'd be willing to bet that there would be no humans to speak of if that was the case. There would be no way for us to even be contemplating this. Maybe some other species would have evolved an "intelligence" of our level instead. To me, this rules out that evolution works with a God, unless you feel that God truly doesn't consider Humans anymore special than other animals. I guess this doesn't rule out a God completely, but it leaves room for only a pretty loose interpretation of one.

[McCulloch]

I feel this at least rules out that a God would have intended to make humans, or that we are at all "special" as compared to other animals. ... To me, this rules out that evolution works with a God, unless you feel that God truly doesn't consider Humans anymore special than other animals. I guess this doesn't rule out a God completely, but it leaves room for only a pretty loose interpretation of one.

You could possibly imagine an all knowing God who created the entire universe, billions of years ago, with the express purpose and knowledge that human life would evolve on this one seemingly insignificant planet.

Nyya.

[Chad]

I feel this at least rules out that a God would have intended to make humans, or that we are at all "special" as compared to other animals. ... To me, this rules out that evolution works with a God, unless you feel that God truly doesn't consider Humans anymore special than other animals. I guess this doesn't rule out a God completely, but it leaves room for only a pretty loose interpretation of one.

You could possibly imagine an all knowing God who created the entire universe, billions of years ago, with the express purpose and knowledge that human life would evolve on this one seemingly insignificant planet.

Nyya.

If he had the express purpose and knowledge that Humans would be a result of evolution, doesn't this conflict with the way that evolution fills the gaps by not caring what the outcome is? If humans are a result that was in God's mind, then certainly evolution is being jerked around and destined towards a certain path, something it doesn't do. Maybe I'm thinking about this the wrong way.