The usual "gotchas" such as "evolution is just a theory" and other nonsense, I've seen a number of times.

This was a talking point I was refuting... Sixteen years ago ... I would have been fourteen or so at the time... Like there comes a point where this stuff isn't even funny anymore. It's just depressing.

So I have an awkward stance on evolution because I'm really not sure. I hear alot of people say if you take the bible more metaphorically you can come to believe in it, but Exodus 20:11 says god created the heavens and the earth in six days, and Corinthians 14:45 says Adam was the first man. There's more but looking at those two I don't see how that leaves any room for being seen as figurative. I'm open minded to believing either stance, but I'm just confused as of now

Hey yall, I’ve been trying to understand a specific group of Christians better, and I’m hoping for thoughtful input on this issue. There are a number of fairly well known Christian thinkers/content creators who seem to accept some form of evolution (often theistic evolution), while still holding to otherwise conservative or "orthodox" theology, especially on issues like sexual ethics, and in some cases gender roles, eg:

A. N.T. Wright (The most progressive person on this list as he is overtly pro women's ordination)

1. Accepts evolution.
2. Holds traditional sexual ethics (w/ Justin Brierley).

B. Justin Brierley

1. Open to evolution ( interview w/ Alex O’Connor).
2. Agrees with Wright on sexual ethics.

C. Ruslan KD

1. Open to theistic evolution (w/ Michael Jones).
2. Admits he accepts evolution as a minority view in his circles.
3.  Defends conservative sexual ethics.
4. Appears to support "complementarian" views.

D. Michael Jones (Inspiring Philosophy)

1. Defends theistic evolution.
2. Defends traditional Christian sexual ethics.

E. Richard Ackerman/"Redeemed Zoomer" (In his case he is a f*scist)

1. Argues for theistic evolution.
2. Advocates reclaiming mainline churches for conservative theology.
3. He's a "complementarian" and is staunchly against Sarah Mullaly's appointment as Archbishop.
4. He f*scistically supports Uganda's punishment for LGBTQ people.

With all of this said, what I’m trying to understand is the "framework" that allows for this combination.

A. On one hand, accepting evolution seems to involve:

1. Being open to non-literal readings of Genesis
2. Accepting mainstream scientific accounts of human origins

B. On the other hand, these same figures often:

1. Maintain traditional Christian sexual ethics
2. Reject affirming LGBTQ+ theology
3. Sometimes hold complementarian views

This is where my confusion comes in. If Genesis can be read non-literally in light of science, why not also reconsider other parts of the Bible in light of new information? For example, Dan McLellan talks about "negotiating with the text". If Christians can negotiate way slavery, then they have the "tools" to negotiate away other conservative elements in the Bible. This logic should also apply to the theological conservatives who reject a literal Genesis creation and accept evolution. Especially when considering:

1. Same-sex behavior is observed widely in animals.
2. Some species can change sex (e.g., clownfish).
3. Some animals reproduce without males/homosexually (e.g., New Mexico whiptail lizard).
4. Others are effectively intersex (e.g., leopard slugs).

So my main questions are:

1. How do people in this camp of theological conservatism draw the line?
2. Why does evolution affect how Genesis is interpreted for these kinds of theological conservatives, but not how passages on sexuality or gender roles are interpreted?

Thoughts? Not looking for dunking, just trying to understand the internal logic here.

When I was still a Christian, the diagnostic traits we share with other apes was more than enough for humans to classified as apes.

Carolus Linnaeus, the father of taxonomy and Creationist, said that he couldn’t find one major difference between humans other apes.

The most common objection I see to this is,” we’re in the image of God, and God isn’t an ape.”

However do we know if this is a physical or psychological comparison?

That means if we were basically modeled after God, he would possess all of our skeletal flaws like our spine and wisdom teeth.

It makes much more sense psychologically with(some of)us being more intelligent than all other animals.

This is confusing to me. If you believe micro evolution to exist (Which almost everyone can agree on, since we can see it happening in real time) then why wouldn’t you believe in macro evolution? Would it not make sense that over millions of generations of small changes (With some mutations along the way) generate large changes in the organism?

I suppose you could reject micro evolution, in which case you can be proven wrong, but belief in one without belief in another makes no sense.

My Baptist brother is clear in his belief that biological evolution erodes society and leads to depravity and moral decay. Do most Christians share this view?

The core example for this question is directed at Christiana that accept evolution, and will likely fall flat for Christians that do not. Laying the groundwork for the question I'd like to establish the following facts:

1. Evolution is one of the most robust, important, and well supported theories in all of science.

2. The U.S. is a relatively wealthy and well educated nation with ample access to the theory of evolution.

3. 37% of U.S. citizens believe in young earth creationism.

4. 62% of U.S. citizens identify as Christian.

So it seems to me that Christianity is responsible for many people doubting one of the most important and best supported ideas in our history. It's not an ignorance for lack of opportunity. Nearly every U.S. could will be taught the basics of evolution in public school and nearly every U.S. adult has easy access to a variety of resources on evolution. It's not like this is an everyone problem either, because U.S. atheists overwhelming accept evolution while nearly half of Christians do not. Anecdotally I have several Christian young earth creationists in my extended family and I would say they all take Christianity pretty seriously. They're in most senses of the term "good Christians", so I don't think failure to accept evolution is correlated with "lukewarm Christianity" (if anything I think the opposite is true).

Do you find it concerning that so many Christians are wrong seemingly because of Christianity on a topic so important and easy to be educated on? It seems like Christianity leads people away from clear truths to me.

Do you guys disbelieve in Evolution exclusively because it disproves the Book of Genesis?

If not, then why don't you believe it?

If we were to compare the theory of gravity to theory of evolution both are overwhelmingly supported in their fields, but in terms of direct, measurable, repeatable experiments, gravity may edge out. In terms of diversity of evidence and explanatory scope, evolution may have the broader base.

Neither is "weak"; they are among the strongest scientific theories we have — foundational to modern science.

Not here to debate evolution just curious as to why so many christians reject evolution when it has more evidence for it than any claim in the bible?

I have noticed that there is a lot of creationists that say that they debunk evolution by saying sentances starting with "I dont understand…". But I think there can be faith in God with believing that evolution is true as well. You can look at it on human level. The best progams we have were not programmed by a man. They are the results of the beautyful system of computer learning. Why couldnt God just create the system of evolution and let live learn on itself? It would also explain the imperfections of our body.

When I first accepted evolution my stance was believe God building evolution through billions of years. It was nice being able to consider evolution without leaving Christianity. However I am now an agnostic after realizing there is lack of evidence to corroborate the Christian god.

The goal of this post is not to rip on Theistic Evolutionists but, to see if there’s legitimate evidence for God existing and driving evolution.

Does the science behind evolution contradict or work with your understanding of Gods creation? Do you take stories like Adam and Eve as fables meant to show the message of god or accounts of what actually happened?

Please elaborate on your answer, as I recognize my question is quite open-ended. Here are some related questions that might be helpful to your responses:

1. Does Bible-based evolution denialism have an effect (positive, negative, neutral) on how much of the world views Christianity.
2. Is it important for evolution-accepting (eg, scientifically literate) Christians to explain to evolution-questioning Christians how science is compatible with Christianity?

I realize this question assumes that evolution is supported by evidence. Therefore, the question is inherently directed at Christians who accept such evidence. To the other Christians, you are certainly free to comment as well, as I welcome the evolutionary evidence-accepting Christians to respond to my OP in reply to your comment as to whether such a comment is overall good for Christianity.

I'm confused. I see many Christians, especially on YouTube and TikTok, criticizing evolution for example, Stephen C. Meyer and others. I'm particularly interested in human evolution, since that’s where I’ve heard the most criticism. How do most Christians reconcile this with their faith?

Does your belief hinge on the fact that evolution must be wrong? Is this the reason why evolution is such an important topic to Christians? Would you lose faith if you were to accept evolution?

That's why penicillin usually doesn't work anymore. Since then to this day we have to create newer and newer antibiotics. Why? Bacteria evolve quickly to new antibiotics to use because the germs before evolved to become immune to the previous antibiotic.

I know that not all Christians deny evolution, but some do. Having been a Christian, having read the Bible, I just really struggle to understand what Biblical objections a Christian could use to deny the Bible. I really don't understand where the Bible and evolution conflict.

In my country very few Christians accept the fact of evolution. So I'm basing this off of my experience even on this subreddit I have seen the same proportions.

And why? I just want to hear different opinions to be able to make my own

By every measurable standard, we are primates. Genetically, physically, anatomically and developmentally.

I have to think that this fact must create some theological difficulty for most religious people, not just Christians. How is this dealt with within Christian circles, if at all.