Thread 18094853

Is evolution compatible with Christian theology?

sure whey not

>>18094853 (OP)
Considering there's been thousands of years of "exegesis" (headcanon) crafted by different theologians to explain away any and every possibly plot hole, most definitely. You just have to accept Genesis as purely metaphorical.

so long as you aren't reducing men to mere animals. which even from a secular standpoint ive been unimpressed with how evolutionists do that. men being unique insofar as being made in God's image is generally better for ethics. rather be led by men who believe they have a standard to uphold.

>>18094853 (OP)
>evolution

>Erectus invented the wheel
Source?

>>18094862
>>18094867
>>18094870
Are you ignoring the part where a human being is of divine essence and came back from the dead?

>>18094879
What did he mean by this?

>>18094853 (OP)
Depends what you mean by "Christian theology" but if you mean the theology of the greek fathers for instance then clearly not. Their whole anthropology and understanding of human nature is based on the idea that Adam was immortal and due to sin, he changed his nature into a more animalistic creature (man as we know him), hence why through theosis you return to that previous state and beyond, hence why the body of those who achieve deification is described as uncorruptible, full of light and so forth. Therefore "Christian theology" is the exact opposite of darwinian evolutionism and we don't even need to get into Genesis being literal or not in order to prove this.

Evolution as a process never has and never will contradict the bible. Evolution as the original of life is not a science however, it's a philosophy on life.

Trying to use science to prove God is intellectually dishonest, as is trying to disprove God. Saying God isn't real and God can't be real because science says this or that, is an argument not even scholars will make.

>>18094853 (OP)
Of course Genesis describes a functionalist ontology rather than a material creation, read Walton

>>18094853 (OP)
what do you mean by 'Christian theology'?

time's up. I'm out

>>18094853 (OP)
No. The Bible (and math) is crystal clear.

>>18094862
Evolution is fake

>>18095032
No physical evidence for gdp=tourism

>>18095037
You're correct. Gdp is Jews. It's a imaginary value.

>>18094853 (OP)
Genetics is compatible with Christian theology, but metaphysical materialism (which is usually what is meant by "evolution") is not compatible with it.

>>18094911
You come from monkeys, churchboy. Deal with it.

>is natural science compatible with superstition
No. You have to discount SO MUCH of the JudeoChristian Bible and explain it away as allegory that the religion is hollowed out and eventually collapses. You end up with Christian flavored atheism, might as well go full retard and be a Young Earth Creationist espousing the flat Earth.

>>18094881
thanks, you beat me. what the fuck cartoon caveman shit is this

>>18094853 (OP)
On a micro-stage, yes.
Not on a macro-stage. But then again, Neo-Darwinism is already getting some serious heat these days. We still can't develop alternative organs and fonctions from body parts without getting uber cancer 99% of the time WHEN WE KNOW THE GENETIC CODE, and we still can't synthesize life in a lab in controlled conditions, despite how 70 years ago scientists were convinced it had to be laughably easy.

>>18095724
Yeah basically. Isn't God's creation wonderful?

>>18095724
big bang is a christian theory...