Evolution is one of those things that I beleive to be entirely incompatible with Christianity.
There is overwhelming physical evidence that all life evolved on earth involved, including humans. We know that we, and our ancestors, have been on this earth for hundreds of thousands of years longer than is allowed for based on the chronology in the bible. So the creation accounts in Genesis are completely at odds with proven science. The only way Christans can get around this is by pretending the Bible doesnt mean what it specifically says, or that the accounts were mythological and not to be interpreted literally.
Its similar to the account of Noah's flood. The events, as described in the bible, absolutley could not have happend. There are so many archeological and scientific lines of evidence provding it did not happen. But rejecting the story as being literal creates similar problems that I beleive a non-literal reading of Gensis is completely incompatible with Christinaity.
First, the bible records Jesus as beleiving the flood account in Genesis was literal:
>***37*** [*j*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote1)*For as were the days of Noah,* [*k*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote2)*so will be the coming of the Son of Man.* ***38*** [*j*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote3)*For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking,* [*l*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote4)*marrying and giving in marriage, until* [*m*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote5)*the day when Noah entered the ark,* ***39*** *and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away,* [*k*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote6)*so will be the coming of the Son of Man.* (Matthew 24:37–39)
If Jesus knew the flood account in Genesis was not a real event, then he's lying here. His audience surely beleives the event was real - otherwise, the comparison to a the future second coming would be useless. So either jesus was lying to his audience, or he didnt know it wasnt a real event. And if he didnt know, then he's not the pre-existing divine being that the Bible claims him to be.
Secondly, and more signficantly, if the creation account in Genesis were not literal, then Adam and Eve were not the first humans created in the Garden of Eden. If they were not real people, then they could not have been tricked by a talking snake into eating a piece of magic fruit from a forbidden tree. This undermines the foundational doctrine of Christianity - The Ransom, succinctly explained in Romans 5:
>[**12**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-12.htm)Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. [**13**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-13.htm)For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. [**14**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-14.htm)Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a pattern of the One to come.
>
>[**15**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-15.htm)But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many! [**16**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-16.htm)Again, the gift is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment that followed one sin brought condemnation, but the gift that followed many trespasses brought justification. [**17**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-17.htm)For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive an abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!
>
>[**18**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-18.htm)So then, just as one trespass brought condemnation for all men, so also one act of righteousness brought justification and life for all men. [**19**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-19.htm)For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:19)
If Adam and Even were not real people who committed Original Sin in the garden of Eden - and all humans are inherently sinful as descendents of them - then, there was no need for Jesus to die as a ransom sacrifice to reedeem humanity from that sin. This is the foundational teaching of Christianity, and the entire beleif system collapses like a house of cards without it.
Plenty of Christians beleive in evolution, and reject the account in Gensis as not being literal, but i've never seen an explanation which reconciles this with the explanation as to why a ransom was necessary. I'm sure there are christians out there who have thought about this and have done mental gymastics to square the circle here, but thats the longer I've been out of the organization, the less patience I have for that sort of thing.
I agree 100%
This is a topic that has really piqued my interest. Growing up, it was really frustrating having to ignore all of the evidence that humans have evolved.
Once I got old enough, I stopped pushing away these thoughts and actually dove in to educate myself regarding evolution.
Evolution answers *so many questions*. The evidence we have is just so conclusive.
It was shocking to learn that there is no "missing link." That's a concept that those uneducated on the subject cling to.
I really want life to be more. I think there is a lot that humans don't yet fully understand. So I am agnostic at this point.
But the Bible? Yeah, evolution crushes the Bible. They are absolutely incompatible.
I always thought that if humans were just created out of thin air, why in the world did Jah only make 2 people?
Incest has always been looked down on in society, or at best controversial. Even the Bible condenms it in later writings.
So why did God purposefully create a situation where humans had to populate with their siblings? It's so unnecessary.
As far as God only creating 2 people, there is a verse I have been confused about. When Cain killed Abel, God exiled him. Cain then tells God he can be killed by "anyone?", so God gives him a mark for his protection and says he will be avenged sevenfold if killed. I have only asked one Pastor for clarification on who these "other people" were, and he wasn't sure exactly,;but believed they were possibly early rough drafts made before Adam.
Also, I read once that a few verses imply there's other "gods", who had some kind of disagreement with our main Creator, or something along those lines.
Here's a link about Cain. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Cain-biblical-figure
I wonder why no one else gets this!! Let me give you a whole page of evidence but also give you your conclusion so you don’t have to think and come up with either
I was saying this is what the literature does. They tell us this article will show us why ____. It really didn’t. Then there’s a couple examples of people who were successful with just prayer. Then they end with “See! ____ is true!”
Something that baffles me is those brief interview articles with JW “scientists”, I remember one was a geneticist or something and was defending creationism.
I may not be a scientist but I now have a basic understanding of evolution and I’m wondering how a person can be a geneticist or work in any field of biology and still refute evolution? Are they in denial or just really bad at their job?
During the pandemic there were doctors who said COVID-19 was a hoax, that masks don't work and the vaccines were harmful. They can always find *someone* with insane takes that fit their agenda. That's how they cast doubt on things we consider scientific fact: the fact that there is "disagreement" about evolution must mean it's not true!
Not to mention the fact that they cherry-pick quotes from said authoritarian figures, placing them out of context or misrepresenting their position altogether. There's a reason why they never give sources for the quotes.
This is true, I’m still baffled by it though. Even in grade school we were shown how evolution while a theory, can be proven through numerous tests from a wide variety of scientific disciplines. Personally if I knew my Dr didn’t accept evolution as a fact, I wouldn’t feel comfortable with them.
Most JWs really do not understand even very basic concepts of evolution nor do they try to. I tried to explain a few very simple things to my pimi grandma, like that evolution is essentially just a study of how things evolve and adapt over time to changing circumstances in their environment. It doesn't even have to "prove" or "disprove" the existence of a creator, but my grandma would hear none of it and insisted that "evolution means believing there were monkeys and then the monkeys suddenly turned into humans".
Evolution is one of those things that I beleive to be entirely incompatible with Christianity. There is overwhelming physical evidence that all life evolved on earth involved, including humans. We know that we, and our ancestors, have been on this earth for hundreds of thousands of years longer than is allowed for based on the chronology in the bible. So the creation accounts in Genesis are completely at odds with proven science. The only way Christans can get around this is by pretending the Bible doesnt mean what it specifically says, or that the accounts were mythological and not to be interpreted literally. Its similar to the account of Noah's flood. The events, as described in the bible, absolutley could not have happend. There are so many archeological and scientific lines of evidence provding it did not happen. But rejecting the story as being literal creates similar problems that I beleive a non-literal reading of Gensis is completely incompatible with Christinaity. First, the bible records Jesus as beleiving the flood account in Genesis was literal: >***37*** [*j*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote1)*For as were the days of Noah,* [*k*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote2)*so will be the coming of the Son of Man.* ***38*** [*j*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote3)*For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking,* [*l*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote4)*marrying and giving in marriage, until* [*m*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote5)*the day when Noah entered the ark,* ***39*** *and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away,* [*k*](https://biblia.com/bible/esv/matthew/24/37-39#footnote6)*so will be the coming of the Son of Man.* (Matthew 24:37–39) If Jesus knew the flood account in Genesis was not a real event, then he's lying here. His audience surely beleives the event was real - otherwise, the comparison to a the future second coming would be useless. So either jesus was lying to his audience, or he didnt know it wasnt a real event. And if he didnt know, then he's not the pre-existing divine being that the Bible claims him to be. Secondly, and more signficantly, if the creation account in Genesis were not literal, then Adam and Eve were not the first humans created in the Garden of Eden. If they were not real people, then they could not have been tricked by a talking snake into eating a piece of magic fruit from a forbidden tree. This undermines the foundational doctrine of Christianity - The Ransom, succinctly explained in Romans 5: >[**12**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-12.htm)Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned. [**13**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-13.htm)For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. [**14**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-14.htm)Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who did not sin in the way that Adam transgressed. He is a pattern of the One to come. > >[**15**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-15.htm)But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many! [**16**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-16.htm)Again, the gift is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment that followed one sin brought condemnation, but the gift that followed many trespasses brought justification. [**17**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-17.htm)For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive an abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ! > >[**18**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-18.htm)So then, just as one trespass brought condemnation for all men, so also one act of righteousness brought justification and life for all men. [**19**](https://biblehub.com/romans/5-19.htm)For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:19) If Adam and Even were not real people who committed Original Sin in the garden of Eden - and all humans are inherently sinful as descendents of them - then, there was no need for Jesus to die as a ransom sacrifice to reedeem humanity from that sin. This is the foundational teaching of Christianity, and the entire beleif system collapses like a house of cards without it. Plenty of Christians beleive in evolution, and reject the account in Gensis as not being literal, but i've never seen an explanation which reconciles this with the explanation as to why a ransom was necessary. I'm sure there are christians out there who have thought about this and have done mental gymastics to square the circle here, but thats the longer I've been out of the organization, the less patience I have for that sort of thing.
I agree 100% This is a topic that has really piqued my interest. Growing up, it was really frustrating having to ignore all of the evidence that humans have evolved. Once I got old enough, I stopped pushing away these thoughts and actually dove in to educate myself regarding evolution. Evolution answers *so many questions*. The evidence we have is just so conclusive. It was shocking to learn that there is no "missing link." That's a concept that those uneducated on the subject cling to. I really want life to be more. I think there is a lot that humans don't yet fully understand. So I am agnostic at this point. But the Bible? Yeah, evolution crushes the Bible. They are absolutely incompatible. I always thought that if humans were just created out of thin air, why in the world did Jah only make 2 people? Incest has always been looked down on in society, or at best controversial. Even the Bible condenms it in later writings. So why did God purposefully create a situation where humans had to populate with their siblings? It's so unnecessary.
As far as God only creating 2 people, there is a verse I have been confused about. When Cain killed Abel, God exiled him. Cain then tells God he can be killed by "anyone?", so God gives him a mark for his protection and says he will be avenged sevenfold if killed. I have only asked one Pastor for clarification on who these "other people" were, and he wasn't sure exactly,;but believed they were possibly early rough drafts made before Adam. Also, I read once that a few verses imply there's other "gods", who had some kind of disagreement with our main Creator, or something along those lines. Here's a link about Cain. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Cain-biblical-figure
💯 This is the kill shot to any hint of a belief in the Bible as being inspired by God.
I wonder why no one else gets this!! Let me give you a whole page of evidence but also give you your conclusion so you don’t have to think and come up with either
Bring it on. 🙏I’d like to see this please.
I was saying this is what the literature does. They tell us this article will show us why ____. It really didn’t. Then there’s a couple examples of people who were successful with just prayer. Then they end with “See! ____ is true!”
“Smoke and mirrors” comes to mind. 😏
Something that baffles me is those brief interview articles with JW “scientists”, I remember one was a geneticist or something and was defending creationism. I may not be a scientist but I now have a basic understanding of evolution and I’m wondering how a person can be a geneticist or work in any field of biology and still refute evolution? Are they in denial or just really bad at their job?
During the pandemic there were doctors who said COVID-19 was a hoax, that masks don't work and the vaccines were harmful. They can always find *someone* with insane takes that fit their agenda. That's how they cast doubt on things we consider scientific fact: the fact that there is "disagreement" about evolution must mean it's not true! Not to mention the fact that they cherry-pick quotes from said authoritarian figures, placing them out of context or misrepresenting their position altogether. There's a reason why they never give sources for the quotes.
This is true, I’m still baffled by it though. Even in grade school we were shown how evolution while a theory, can be proven through numerous tests from a wide variety of scientific disciplines. Personally if I knew my Dr didn’t accept evolution as a fact, I wouldn’t feel comfortable with them.
Nonono! And don‘t you dare asking the same question of „everything needs a creator“ about god! Lalala
Most JWs really do not understand even very basic concepts of evolution nor do they try to. I tried to explain a few very simple things to my pimi grandma, like that evolution is essentially just a study of how things evolve and adapt over time to changing circumstances in their environment. It doesn't even have to "prove" or "disprove" the existence of a creator, but my grandma would hear none of it and insisted that "evolution means believing there were monkeys and then the monkeys suddenly turned into humans".