Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Can a Christian believe in evolution and do Christians believe neanderthals were human?

281 replies

jinglebelly · 31/01/2011 21:34

Just curious

OP posts:
tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 00:27

have given up Blush have just started new ou course so assignemts seem to be due by the week, so have taken up cycling every where to make up for it. are you still doing, havent got the name change? as havent even visited the thread for a few weeks.

beatenbyayellowteacup · 04/02/2011 00:29

No me neither - but I'm at the gym every second day and trying to shred at least once a week.

Still fat.

tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 00:35

I dont understand what lilred sayes? do you say that the translation is inacurate? and deliberatly so? I once had a n RE teacher who was very modern thinking back in ohh the 70s/80's, even for those days in the catholic church where he predicted same sex mariages and adoption and was very pro.

he once said that the bible had been interpreted incorrectly, but he never elaborated on it, so it did at the time leave me wondering.

I now attend a church on occassions where the priest who is polish is very orthodox in my sence of the word and I fear the mass my children hear from him contradicts the upbringing I have had where the church is open minded and will in time accept modern day life. It maybe true that the church predicted scientific advances and through lack of knowledge sabotaged some interpretaion for thier own gain.

MillyR · 04/02/2011 00:36

Mackerel, yes I think people do need to be able to read Hebrew and New Testament Greek to interpret the bible properly.

Many people who can't do that rely on guidance from others, and some guidance is in the footnotes of many editions of the bible.

tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 00:37

I think if you have time on your hands at home the shred is great but if you have other comitments gym and outdoor exersis is more practical.

I will do it but just need to get my house in order with study etc.

fat and proud. Grin

beatenbyayellowteacup · 04/02/2011 00:38

Little Red - so when is early Modern?

tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 00:40

sorry not lilred I should have said MAC

mackereltaitai · 04/02/2011 00:40

beaten, what accuracy? Birds AFAIK are thought to have descended from dinosaurs, whales from land mammals. How does that all fit with the Genesis account?

beatenbyayellowteacup · 04/02/2011 00:42

Ah. Ok I thought birds and sea animals predated land-dwelling animals. Could be wrong.

tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 00:44

I think land mammals may have descended from sea mammals?

Morloth · 04/02/2011 00:45

Perhaps God created birds by starting with dinosaurs?

Morloth · 04/02/2011 00:46

I think there was some coming and going as far as water/land evolution, wasn't there?

beatenbyayellowteacup · 04/02/2011 00:48

But Morioth - AFAIK neither Genesis nor evolution would suggest this to be the case?

MillyR · 04/02/2011 00:49

There is coming and going. Seals are descended from land based animals.

Morloth · 04/02/2011 01:01

The birds from dinos or the coming and going beaten? both are pretty prevalent in evolutionary theory, all we get from Genesis is that God created them, it doesn't say how.

beatenbyayellowteacup · 04/02/2011 01:02

sorry x-posted.

I meant birds from dinosaurs. I'm not an expert in evolutionary theory - I just find the whole thing fascinating.

MillyR · 04/02/2011 01:09

It is very common for people to believe in both a creator God and evolution. In a sense all of those people are creationists. It is just a shame that the term 'creationist' has become associated with people who believe that God created the world without evolution.

There have always been close links between science and religion. The first person to propose the big bang theory was also a Catholic priest.

Morloth · 04/02/2011 01:14

I know more than I have ever wanted or needed to about dinosaurs beaten courtesy of having a small boy and living within walking distance of the Natural History Museum.

JaneS · 04/02/2011 09:13

beaten - early modern means the bit that comes after medieval, so it's around 1550-1700. Having looked it up, the Papal decree to switch to the Gregorian calendar was 1582 and England didn't actually go for it until the middle of the 18th century!

Arguing about religion and pre-history without knowledge of recorded history seems pretty common and is a bit strange to me, but I expect that's because I feel quite protective of the people who did once believe in all the stuff we mock now.

Original poster
jinglebelly · 04/02/2011 10:50

Another question, is the bible the basis of Christianity, i.e. one of the fundamental - if not the fundamental - aspects of the Christian faith, how can it be taken 'with a pinch of salt' by the majority of Christians? I mean if it is the way in which Christians learn about their faith how do you know which bits to believe? Are their any other ways of learning about the faith rather than following the bible?

OP posts:
Morloth · 04/02/2011 10:55

To be a Christian all you have to believe is that Christ was the son of God (or an aspect or a part of God himself) who was sacrificed to pay a debt.

The other stuff in the bible is IMO guidance and window dressing, but to be a Christian all you need to do is to believe in Christ.

Blood sacrifice is a pretty ongoing theme for humanity.

JaneS · 04/02/2011 11:08

I agree with Morloth.

As to other ways, I think it tends to be Protestants who are really keen on the Bible as the fundamental authority. Non-Protestants tend to have other authorities (eg. the Pope, the Church Fathers) to go to.

I don't see how anyone could think the Bible is meant to be taken literally. It contradicts itself.

tomhardyismydh · 04/02/2011 12:00

As a catholic The bible featured little in my education. The basis of my religious study was the creed, ie I belive in jesus christ son of god. The new testiment is very much the focus. I think other christian denominations focus more heavily on the old testiment

LadyOfTheManor · 04/02/2011 12:50

MillyR- Scientific theory is NOT "supported" by fact. Fact for you, indeed, but for those of that reject those "facts" then there is no support. The "facts" are just more theories.

I am responding bit by bit as I go through the last few posts!

LadyOfTheManor · 04/02/2011 12:59

Yes- we're taught to become a "Christian" you have to accept that Christ was a human sacrifice-to basically build a bridge between God and Man ("The only way to the Father is through the Son"..."For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten Son..." John 3:16 (?))

The Mosaic laws were often "dropped" for several reasons, Jesus "renewed them" in the NT, culturally they were unnecessary so a "pinch of salt" is often needed. For example, pork was never eaten not because it's an "unclean" animal but because of the heat of the Middle East-pork spoils the fastest...that doesn't mean, to me, that I can't eat pork today. In my Bible study we studied things that were "unsaid" in the Bible and how to take a "conscience" decision on the matter-and how we think God would feel if we did that.

For eg it doesn't say hmmmm "Don't pull wings off birds using your teeth".

I wouldn't do that as I think that it's cruel, and God wouldn't like it (also it would be culturally unacceptable).

So that pinch of salt is normally a faith call-judgement within the circumstances.

PS: This is NOT a get out clause of things we don't want to do!

Swipe left for the next trending thread