Can theory of natural selection co-exist with the Idea of God?

[bzcxx]

If all living things on earth evolved through natural selection, and since natural selection is random and unpredictable (without design), and if something random doesn’t have design, does that mean there’s no creator?

The bible says that we are all created in God’s image. If we evolved from early humans (and if we trace back far enough - some kind of bacteria), does that mean we are not created in his likeness and image?

[NamerOfStars]

Of course it can. The basic existence of cause and effect shows that not every single detail of the universe is settled by divine whim. If I hold a coin above the table and let it go, it will fall- that much is settled by gravity. But whether it will hit the table is another matter- I can catch it again, or interpose another object, or bat it out of the way, or move the table, or change the direction of gravity- the absence of a guiding force leaving predictable results indicates a set of underlying laws, but those in no way indicate a lack of AVAILABLE guiding forces. It may well be that the reason for the creation of the universe was "to see what would happen".

Here's the thing, though: natural selection isn't random. NOTHING is random; "random" simply means you haven't found the pattern yet. In terms of natural selection, what works in the forest doesn't work in the sea, which doesn't work on the tundra, which doesn't work in the caves, and so on. But wings evolved twice, in VERY different ways; fingers at least two dozen times; the eye, SCORES of times; certain things are going to be useful almost regardless of circumstances. The dominant lifeforms on Earth at the time of the P-T extinction were reptiles that were headed towards mammalhood. They died, but the same traits started showing up again not too long thereafter, and went on to rule the roost after the K-T extinction opened up new ecological niches. Even MUTATION isn't random; it's simply not predictable.

As far as being made in the image of God, as would have been obvious even at the time, that doesn't refer specifically to physique; there are WAY too many variations on "human", even with every other subspecies gone, for that to indicate that we're all just tweaks on a basic design. I mean, even leaving out height and weight variations, skin color and gender alone would require a God whose appearance was truly psychedelic- and if that WAS the case, then a regular human's physique wouldn't match up.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

1. That designe is God creation and God way to create, humans should not limitate to such of theory. God can crate something anythime out of nothing in just 1 second that for humans will look like a way longer time to do so.

2. You should not read it reteraly. Not evrething is a definition whit full instructions. That one say that we are created that way whit our sould, feeling of good, love, care, happines.

[jshm2]

Sure, as God is only of the oldest ideas of civilisation.

Whereas natural selection doesn't stand up on it's own. In fact its probably bogus as it's based on the 13% of fossil bones that have been found.

[slatyb]

Thats just one idea of God, and yes, it’s incompatible with what we now know about the evolution of life on Earth.

[Anonymous]

All mainstream dogmas will only confuse you. And because they're dogmas anyway, they can all coexist as they aren't even supposed to be true.

[Avicenna]

Absolutely. I see no conflict.

[bzcxx]

Can you explain? In theology, they’re opposing schools of thought

[Avicenna]

Im not a theologian. Im a former science teacher and a believer.

[bzcxx]

So then do you believe in the Big Bang or that the universe was created in 7 days?

[Avicenna]

I believe the Big Bang is the best current explanation of the origin of the universe. But the creation story is consistent with what science tells us happened. The two are not mutually exclusive.