I’m not really sure why but this is a common argument thrown at me. Is it because people think that evolution is against creation? Or vice versa? The whole Evolution vs Creation idea, to me is silly, no offence. If you have an understanding of both viewpoints I think you will agree with me.
Evolution
First of all, the argument is actually about the idea of the Origin of Life which is technically not called evolution anymore. Evolution is defined in the Collins dictionary as “a process of gradual change that takes place over many generations, during which species of animals, plants, or insects slowly change some of their physical characteristics” (source – collinsdictionary.com). Specifically, the way that the DNA changes from parents to children, either because of mutations or by the mixing of the two parents DNA to create the offspring’s DNA.
Let’s explore this using a bear as an example. The male may have larger paws than the female, but the female has longer claws. Their offspring, the baby bear gets a mix of the parents DNA resulting in large paws and long claws. But through a mutation, also ends up with hairy ears that neither of the parents had. That’s simplified but you get the idea.
If you want to learn more about that, check out the “What is Evolution?” video on YouTube by Stated Clearly. (The bear example is basically theirs).
Now, as you can see, there is nothing about that which goes against creation.
Evolution Theory of Natural Selection
This is much the same, the only difference is that the mutation creates something beneficial to the organism which helps in its environment. Which means that the organism gets defined as a different species to the original because of the mutation. It may be a defence trait like thorns on a plant or a colouring that helps camouflage the organism from predators. And again, there is nothing here that goes against creation.
Evolutionary Tree
Scientists, in their search for the Origins of Life, have created what is called an evolutionary tree. It’s similar to a family tree but instead of linking direct ancestors, it is an attempt to link species and similar organisms back to an original organism that then evolved into everything else.
The best example is dogs. Dogs have evolved from wolves through people keeping the mutations that they liked in the offspring, colours, strength etc. By continuing to do this over thousands of years, this has resulted in many different species of dogs. So, on the evolutionary tree of dogs, the original organism is a grey wolf.
The theory of this, for all creatures including us humans, takes everything back to a single cell organism like an amoeba.
Now, here is where I will probably get shot by other Christians, because I will argue that this still doesn’t go against Creation.
Creation
Creation is the story from the Bible, about how God created the world and all living things, specifically Humans, from the dust and He breathed life into the first Human, Adam. And that God did it all in seven days, well, six because He rested on the seventh day.
Does that go against evolution? Well, yes, if you take it literally. But the Bible is not a literal book. It is made up of many different books and writing styles. Ask any true theologian and they will tell you that there are many books that are not meant to be taken literally. The obvious one is the book of Psalms. While there are stories in there, it is written in a poetic style. The book of Proverbs is not a literal book either. It is a bunch of quotes put together to use as life tools. It is called a book of wisdom. There are many books that are historical in nature and there are parts of lots of books that are genealogical in nature.
Genesis
The book of Genesis, which creation is a part of, is a mix of everything. It is part poetic, part wisdom, part historical and part genealogical. Guess what part the Creation acco
unt is considered? If you said poetic, you would be correct. This means that the author was using a mix of description to paint a picture that describes the event, rather than wanting it to be taken literally.
So, if it is poetic in nature, then the seven day account might have happened over thousands or even millions of years. Then each “days” account is more of a tale of each event being grouped together, rather than an actual “days” account. With this in mind, you can fit evolution in there and argue that the Bible does not go against the evolutionary tree theory. Remember also that the Bible says that a thousand years is like a day to God (Psalm 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8).
Origin of Life Theory
Let’s return to the scientists and the newer theory of how life came to be. The Origin of Life theory goes into how the amoeba came to be and can actually begin to explain that it may not have been the only organism that everything else evolved from. (I may be taking a bit of a jump there but my understanding of the theory suggests that not only could a simple life form have come from the theory, but a complex life too).
The theory goes like this, when certain elements are in proximity to each other, they can bond and create molecules, like oxygen and hydrogen do to make water. When these molecules join with other molecules, they can create both simple and complex structures, possibly including a living organism eventually. They also describe this process as Chemical Evolution. That is simplified, if you want to learn more, I suggest watching the videos on the Stated Clearly YouTube channel.
Creation with Evolution
Now Chemical Evolution is still a theory and the keywords in all of that is “possibly including a living organism”. My theory suggests that it is not Evolution vs Creation but rather Creation with Evolution. If it is possible that Creation actually took millions of years, then it is not too much of a stretch to imagine that God did what humans did with wolves.
Using what we call Chemical Evolution, God created life. As it says in Genesis, He took the dust and formed living creatures. Then by Biological Evolution, He breed the right organisms together, eventually resulting in the Human form. He then breathed life into it, which I think is referencing giving us a soul and a conscience, so that we are made in His image. Not literally looking like Him, but resembling Him by having a life different to animals. By which, I mean that we think for ourselves and don’t just act on natural urges.
By considering this possibility, this theory of mine, you can explain why there were dinosaurs, mammoths and other fossils that have been found. Including ancient human remains.
It’s either that or the Bible account is literal and all the dinosaur bones etc., were added as a joke to try to confuse us.
OK, I’m joking there, but seriously, if a thousand years are like a day to God, it is possible that my theory is spot on. What do you think? Leave me a comment below and tell me all about it!
This Christian's Opinion 