This post is a challenge to Christians. Do you accept that there is a possibility that man is the result of an evolutionary process?
For the purpose of exploring the implications of this challenge, I’ll take it as read that God exists and that Jesus is who he claimed to be – if those points are not accepted then I don’t think one can consider oneself a Christian. But what might an acceptance of the possibility of evolution mean?
It seems to me, that accepting the possibility that evolution is true then means that one has to accept the possibility that:
- the Genesis account of creation is not to be taken literally, and so must be interpreted in a different way
- not much else
So I struggle to understand logically why so many Christians are so afraid of the theory of evolution. I can of course understand why it is disliked, since certain outspoken atheists make outrageous claims that evolution has disproved God, or that if the first chapter of the Bible cannot be taken literally then you cannot believe the rest, or …. fill in the blanks for yourself. But such claims have no foundation, and we need to be able to discern what is truth and what is simply rhetoric. Sometimes truth comes from the most unpleasant people, but that doesn’t change whether it is true or not.
But if the man in the street hears both Christians and Atheists saying that evolution is inconsistent with God then it seems to me that the vast body of scientific opinion in support of evolution will lead him to think that Christianity must be false. And that would be a tragedy.
So if you are a Christian, my challenge is to entertain the possibility that evolution is true, and try to discern what this would tell you about God, and about how to interpret the Bible. It may be that your current understanding is incomplete; might that be possible, or are you so certain that you are right…..?
Related posts:
https://philhemsley.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/information-dna-and-evolution/
https://philhemsley.wordpress.com/2013/04/14/proof-of-god/
Thoughts from a Minimalist Christian 
Having a scientific upbringing, that’s essentially what I’ve always believed (about evolution being a divine instrument, and Genesis being non-literal). That’s not so heretical when you consider how easily most Christians accept Revelation as a largely symbolic text. I really don’t see what all the fuss is about.
LikeLike
It’s not so difficult to think that science is a method for trying to understand how some divine plan unfolded. I have stopped trying to be a christian but I do think and hope there is a spiritual element to our universe. Which came first, spirit or cosmos? That seems a more interesting thing to ponder than chickens & eggs. And if Prof Hawking and colleagues can come up with a theory of everything, I want to see spirit accounted for.
LikeLike
Thanks for the comment Deri. Can Prof Hawking come up with a theory for why we find music beautiful, or indeed what beauty, or love, or joy are? If we think about it, none of what actually matters to us as human beings is explicable by physics….
LikeLike
A friend once said to me (in regards to there having to be more than science said) that “math is colorblind”. And basically, what he meant by that is what you just said. Most science comes down to math. Has anyone found a mathematically perfect song? No. And no one ever will. Has anyone found a mathematically perfect image? No. And no one ever will. Has anyone ever weaved a mathematically perfect story? No. And no one ever will.
Why? Because Math is colorblind. It may reach a person’s mind, but it will never reach a person’s soul.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi MC, just another response. I am a christian (have been for 50 years) and I accept that evolutionary science is true. It hasn’t destroyed my faith to think that, but it has changed my beliefs in a few more ways than your post suggests. For example:
* It makes it possible that more than Genesis 1-3 in the OT is mythical.
* It makes it more difficult to explain evil in the world, because animals preying on other animals was there before the fall of humankind.
* It means some parts of the NT, which refer to Adam & Eve, have to be reconsidered.
None of that is all that big a deal, and I think accepting evolution is very freeing for my faith and understanding. Well done for raising these questions.
PS I’m interested to see (1) you’ve written a book (well done!) and (2) you’re an engineer (I was a civil engineer until I retired).
LikeLike
Dear Unklee, Thanks for the comments. Some further thoughts:
– I agree that there may be more ‘myth’ or ‘parable’ in the OT, which doesn’t detract from its value I feel. We don’t take Jesus’ parables literally, but they still convey truth.
– I’m not convinced that animals preying on animals is evil – we anthropomorphise and tend to think it is, but what actually is evil? I feel it’s something like the deliberate choice to harm another thing – and I don’t think animals do that. (Is it evil to drill holes in children’s teeth and fill them with metal?)
– Denis Alexander writes some interesting suggestions on Adam and Eve in http://www.amazon.co.uk/Creation-Evolution-Do-Have-Choose/dp/1854247468
PS – you can read the start of both my books from links above… 🙂
LikeLike
By the way, just checked out your blog – I gave up discussing with Arkanaten. I decided have better things to do with my time.
LikeLike
Yes, I think we always need to decide which discussions are helpful and which seem to be going in circles.
LikeLike
Hi MC. I agree that the “problems” with interpreting Genesis in the light of evolution are presumably capable of resolution, but I only meant that there was some work to be done. I checked out the Denis Alexander book on Amazon, and it looks excellent.
Thanks for visiting my blog, but I hadn’t realised you had been discussing with anyone. Yes, some discussions go somewhere, some don’t.
I checked out the start of both of your books, and they look interesting. Was it easy to get the first one printed and published? Do you get many sales?
Best wishes.
LikeLike
I think we probably agree on most things!
The first one I self published, so it was easy. It was mainly written for people I know, but I have had some further sales. The difficulty with self publishing is that nobody knows… I’m looking for a publisher for the second.
LikeLike
I think you’ll find the vast majority of Christians accept evolution as God’s creative process: there really isn’t any problem here except, unfortunately, with a certain sector of die-hard conservatives and biblical literalists…
LikeLike
Hi Phil, thanks for the comment and follow. My concern is more that the image outside of Christian circles is that the general public think Christians view evolution as in conflict with the bible and therefore wrong. It’s a myth propagated by extreme atheists and extreme evangelicals, so if both ends of the belief spectrum say the same thing they must be right…?
LikeLike
Pingback: Things that a Minimalist Christian does not have to take literally – The Genesis account of Creation | Thoughts from a Minimalist Christian
I just wanted to say, I had teetered on the edge of being for and against evolution for a long time, until a couple years ago when I had a chance to talk to some passing seminary students about the literal and non literal interpretations of Genesis. I still don’t have everything sorted out, but I lean towards evolution, and don’t support young earth creationism.
I would also add that throughout the first thousand years of Christianity, Christian authors like the Venerable Bede and St. Thomas Aquinas believed that predation existed before the fall of mankind. Here’s Aquinas’s reply: (question 96, reply to objection 2) http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1096.htm
“In the opinion of some, those animals which now are fierce and kill others, would, in that state, have been tame, not only in regard to man, but also in regard to other animals. But this is quite unreasonable. For the nature of animals was not changed by man’s sin, as if those whose nature now it is to devour the flesh of others, would then have lived on herbs, as the lion and falcon. Nor does Bede’s gloss on Genesis 1:30, say that trees and herbs were given as food to all animals and birds, but to some. Thus there would have been a natural antipathy between some animals.”
LikeLike
Thanks Carla
LikeLike
I do write a lot about faith and evolution. Not all of it serious. I believed the theory of Evolution long before I was a Christian. Seems bizarre to reject something so obviously true.
LikeLike
I’d have to say that evolutionary theory is neither obvious nor “true”. It is valid and has some elements of verifiable, evidential support but it has HUGE holes in it. Science is working hard on “proof” but most of the “facts” are based on conjecture, as is most of Archeology. That doesn’t make it wrong either…
LikeLike
Pingback: The End of Evolution | Thoughts from a Minimalist Christian