I’m talking about the specific kind of objection many YEC have for evolution being compatible with a christian worldview, which is to say that evolution reduces people to instinct-driven animals and takes away the image of God and our spiritual nature.
2 Likes
What do you think? Is their claim true?
My view is that the claim is irrelevant and cannot disprove evolution. So, we need to better understand scripture, our natures and our relationship to God, particularly through the work of Jesus.
I think there’s an element of pride to that objection. Ecclesiastes 3:18-21 says this:
I also said to myself, “As for humans, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. Surely the fate of human beings is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; humans have no advantage over animals. Everything is meaningless. All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. Who knows if the human spirit rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?”
The thing that struck me most when I first read those verses was the three words in verse 18, “God tests them.” Let’s face it – it does take a certain amount of humility to view yourself in terms of being like, or related to, the animals, and if the idea offends you, then you’ve failed the test.
Having said that, there does seem to be a difference between humans and animals in Scripture, and that difference is one of authority and responsibility. In Genesis 1:26-28 God talks about creating humans to rule over the rest of the animal kingdom. But with great power comes great responsibility. God’s only command to the rest of the animal kingdom was just “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” It was only when people came on the scene that He started giving more detailed and specific instructions, such as as what we see in the very next chapter with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and their command not to take of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
4 Likes
The question is too general. We might as well ask are humans more than living things? The answer is clearly yes to that one. Let’s try are humans more than mammals? Anything we might say in answer would simply get at something that sets us apart from other mammals but there are things to say about any mammal that sets them apart too. But of course we are the ones doing the asking and the only ones we can imagine capable of asking something so abstract. Likewise we are the only ones we can imagine asking about the existence of God. But I wonder if our asking makes us closer to or further from God and how do we compare in that regard to the experience of other animals?
And YECism doesn’t rescue one from this “demeaning” perspective of origins - they may complain that they don’t like the thought of shared lineage with animals, but they turn around and have us coming directly from dirt! There really isn’t any way to escape the eventual humility imposed on us. May as well wear it like a crown - since as you and the ecclesiastical sage note, all animals including us return from whence we came.
4 Likes
2 posts were merged into an existing topic: “The End of Apologetics: Christian Witness in a Postmodern Context” by Myron B. Penner
In other creation myths the lesser gods were angry and rebellious at being forced to work for the higher god so humans were made. Genesis has a different take on things: we alone are said to be made in God’s image and share in his creation as its stewards. Everything in creation is deemed good in Genesis. On the sixth day" very good." The Bible clearly teaches (or starts with the accommodated assumption?) that we are higher up on the ontological ladder than other life on the planet. The apple in Daddy’s eye. Though not a few chapters later during the flood!
Biologically speaking, we are simply the top rung on the evolutionary latter but are we the pinnacle or does it keep going? We control our environment now to a solid extent but yes, humans are animals but we are somehow very different from all the rest in our capacity for thought, religion, love, art etc. It may be a ramp more than steps but were are different. I know I don’t have the same moral expectations of animals or think an animal’sl life is as valuable as a human life. If it came down to saving one child vs saving one hundred cows or even my own pets, its a no brainer.
Vinnie
There is no evolutionary ladder. There is an evolutionary tree.
1 Like
Are you insinuating that the entire biome of this planet exists primarily to serve as our exclusive larder? 
1 Like
Tallest branch if you want to be pedantic with analogies. Maybe I am ignorant but did live evolve from complex to simple? Or was it the other way around? I don’t think my ladder analogy is wrong from that perspective but I’m no biologist.
Not for us. Not on this mote. We have insufficient capacity for social justice. I fear that’s an opportunity cost that evolution cannot make anywhere.
No, I’m trying to be accurate. The tree of life better reflects reality than any ladder. Life can become simpler. And we have lost entire branches from the tree of life.
2 Likes
And what about what I said about Genesis? Do you agree or disagree?
“In other creation myths the lesser gods were angry and rebellious at being forced to work for the higher god so humans were made. Genesis has a different take on things: we alone are said to be made in God’s image and share in his creation as its stewards. Everything in creation is deemed good in Genesis. On the sixth day" very good." The Bible clearly teaches (or starts with the accommodated assumption?) that we are higher up on the ontological ladder than other life on the planet. The apple in Daddy’s eye. Though not a few chapters later during the flood!”
We are the pinnacle of creation in Genesis. But what I was addressing was what you said “biologically speaking,” and only that.
We are “feeder mice” for human hookworms!
2 Likes
I am asking if you agree with Genesis on that point.
A careful reading of the Bible does not actually seem to make as much of a distinction between humans and animals as later Western Christian philosophers. As has been pointed out, the book of Ecclesiastes says that humans die just as the beasts (Ecclesiastes 3:19). Humans are born, live, eat, sleep, reproduce, get sick, and die just like animals. What is unique about humans is their special relationship with God and the special role they have been given in creation. Because of this special relationship and role, humans have been given unique abilities. I would say that science generally agrees with this idea. Humans are essentially animals, but humans are also very extraordinary animals capable of doing things on much larger scales and in much more complex ways than other animals. This is because of the expanded cognitive capacity of human beings as well as hyper-sociality and unusually strong impulse control.
2 Likes
Come to think of it, we humans are described as a little lower than the angels, so I guess not.
1 Like
Well humans are just animals.
We are in the homo genus.
We are in the primate order.
We are in the animal kingdom.
We share a common ancestor with all other animals.
If somehow we have descendants in a billion years from now those will be animals as well. That means yes, Jesus was also a animal. That’s all biologically speaking.
If you’re wanting to use a different definition by subtracting it adding to it, then you would have to detail that one. I mean we are mammals right? If we are mammals then why are we not also primates or animals?
I’ve only heard it as “humans are just evolved apes.”