Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[tonychanyt]

I use the term evolution biologically and technically. It describes the process by which populations of organisms change over time through successive generations. It is driven by natural selection, genetic drift, mutation, and gene flow.

Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

Sure, but you don't have to. You can assume evolution without believing in it. Let's talk about the utility of the theory of Evolution.

I am a Christian. I used the evolution model to implement AI programs. They are called evolutionary algorithms. You don't have to believe in evolution to work with it. If you search US patents in the last ten years, you will find many applications of evolution models. The theory of evolution has practical values. The US economy benefits from it. You cannot deny its utility.

Unlike other branches of hard science, evolution has less mathematical support. Nevertheless, it is a useful paradigm.

The Cheating Cell: How Evolution Helps Us Understand and Treat Cancer

If the theory works in daily practical life, there is no need to reject it. There is no need to believe in it either in the sense of spiritual faith.

See also

• Adam, Eve, and evolution
• How old is the earth?.

 

[trophy33]

There is no need to believe in it either in the sense of spiritual faith.

Do we believe in any scientific discovery in the sense of spiritual faith?

 

[tonychanyt]

Do we believe in any scientific discovery in the sense of spiritual faith?

Sure, I put a weight on everything. See Dark matter, dark energy, and the spiritual realm.

 

[FaithT]

Of course you can. the priests I’ve talked to about this are some of the holiest men I’ve met and they believe In evolution. As long as we realize that God is the first cause.

 

[Harry Larry]

I can believe a chair was built with a hammer. But I still can also believe someone wielded that hammer.

 

[sfs]

Unlike other branches of hard sciences, there is not as much mathematical justification for Evolution.

Scientific theories are never justified mathematically; mathematics is used in scientific theories to model behavior of systems. The more complex the system, the harder it is to model mathematically. Since evolution concerns extremely complex systems, it's harder to model than, say, elementary particles.

 

[tonychanyt]

Scientific theories are never justified mathematically;

How do astronomers make predictions?

 

[sfs]

How do astronomers make predictions?

By making mathematical models of whatever they're making predictions about, of course. But it's not the math that justifies the models -- it's agreement with observation. You can have the sweetest mathematical model with the fanciest math and if it doesn't match reality, it's useless scientifically.

 

[Harry Larry]

By making mathematical models of whatever they're making predictions about, of course. But it's not the math that justifies the models -- it's agreement with observation. You can have the sweetest mathematical model with the fanciest math and if it doesn't match reality, it's useless scientifically.

There is actually a branch of math (it has a weird name I can never remember, something like "tubulation" or something) that entirely deals with locating the flaws in the math and fine tuning it through subtle changes. The result, I would say, is "the fanciest math"!

 

[Solo81]

Yes, we can.
The scriptural account of creation was never intended to an explicit explanation of how everything came into being.

 

[tonychanyt]

But it's not the math that justifies the models

Define justify.

 

[Psalm 27]

Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

No

 

[sfs]

Define justify.

From the OED: 3.a. (a1393–) transitive. To make good (an argument, statement, or opinion); to confirm or support by attestation or evidence; to corroborate, prove, verify.

 

[sfs]

No

Note that you've just violated site rules.

 

[tonychanyt]

From the OED: 3.a. (a1393–) transitive. To make good (an argument, statement, or opinion); to confirm or support by attestation or evidence; to corroborate, prove, verify.

Let proposition P1 = Scientific theories are supported mathematically.

True?

 

[sfs]

Let proposition P1 = Scientific theories are supported mathematically.

True?

Define 'supported'. Or rather, note that the definition wasn't just 'support' but 'to confirm or support by attestation or evidence'. Scientific theories are not confirmed or supported by attestation or evidence by mathematics.

 

[tonychanyt]

Define 'supported'. Or rather, note that the definition wasn't just 'support' but 'to confirm or support by attestation or evidence'. Scientific theories are not confirmed or supported by attestation or evidence by mathematics.

Let proposition P2 = Scientific theories are corroborated by mathematics.

True?

 

[sfs]

Let proposition P2 = Scientific theories are corroborated by mathematics.

True?

False.

 

[tonychanyt]

False.

Let proposition P3 = Scientific theories are supported by mathematics.

True?

 

[sfs]

Let proposition P3 = Scientific theories are supported by mathematics.

True?

Instead of asking all of these questions, why not just explain what you meant by saying that theories can have more or less mathematical justification? The propositions you're offering are pretty much meaningless without a context.