Article 2 - Approaching Evolution
In my first article, I spoke on how evolution has been the key theory in explaining the existence of all the forms of life that we see in the world today. We saw also the controversy that arose in response to this theory, especially from religious groups. Christians, in particular, reacted mostly in one of two ways: by rejecting it totally, or embracing it and saying that it fits in perfectly with the Christian faith. Whichever the response, the same claim was upheld: "Evolution does not disprove God!" This article will closely explore these two approaches and understand why they would both still somehow come to the same conclusion.
Creationism Explored
One view that many Christians hold is that the universe was created in the literal six days as clearly stated in Genesis chapter 1, which renders the theory of evolution as the explanation for the appearing of all life entirely untrue. This view, arguably, was the view that almost all Christians adopted up till the birth of Darwin's theory of evolution, which begged some form of reconciliation with the bible. Creationists maintain that evolution, or the idea of an earth billions of years old is inconsistent with what is explicitly said in the bible. Here are three main reasons why:
1. The bible says that creation was a six day event. If we believe the bible to be the inspired word of God (and there is a LOT of proof for that), then what is written in the bible must be true, even if it seems to go against the popular opinion in the world. If you read the creation account as recorded in Genesis, without any presuppositions, you'd come to the conclusion that the universe and all that's in it was created in six 24-hour days. Although some object by saying that the word "day" in Genesis 1 could simply be referring to a long period of time, a closer look at the original Hebrew text and context indicates that is clearly not the case. Click here for more information on this issue.
2. There is scientific proof suggesting that the earth is young (typified as approx. 10000 years old). Here are some examples, without going into the details, which you can read up for yourself here:
a. The lack of transitional fossils (which should abound if evolution over billions of years is true)
b. The abnormally fast rate of decay of the earth's magnetic field
c. The lack of helium in the earth's atmosphere
d. The lack of sodium in the sea, or mud on the sea floor
e. The unusual observed shape of galaxies and much more.
3. Evolution is a weak theory. Because it occurred over billions of years, tests to prove it cannot be reproduced in a laboratory, and the theory as such is arguably not empirical, as a science. One of its main criticism given by creationists is the problem of "good mutations". Natural selection is driven by the occurrence of random mutations, of which beneficial ones are favoured and thus retained, and subsequently passed on to future generations. The objection raised by critics is this: over 99.9% of all genetic mutations that scientists observe today are harmful to the organism, if not fatal. Beneficial mutations are extremely rare, and virtually never result in actual new information, thus rendering the possibility of a single cell evolving into a complex organism almost zero. The genetic variation that we observe in the world today that allows organisms to adapt to their environments is the result of re-sorting or a loss of genetic information, better termed "devolution". Random mutations, creationists uphold, simply cannot result in the addition of new information.
Side note: One of the main promoters of creationism today is an organisation called Answers in Genesis (AiG), a trustworthy and biblical organisation, in my opinion, whose motto is "Upholding the Authority of the Bible from the Very First Verse". They have produced countless books, videos and a very comprehensive website (answersingenesis.org) in which you'll find answers to almost every question you could possibly have concerning creation and evolution.
Theistic Evolution Explored
The term "theistic evolution" is slightly misleading, because it has come to describe a whole variety of ways in which Christians reconcile evolution with the bible. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm using it to broadly describe the belief that evolution was the main method God used to create all life in this world, regardless of precisely how Genesis chapter 1 (and 2) should be interpreted. Let's now look at the main arguments theistic evolutionists use to defend their view:
1. The Genesis account of creation was not written as a scientific article (and is thus not to be taken literally). Theistic evolutionists do not doubt that the bible is God's word, but do not think that when Moses (as tradition has it) wrote Genesis, he had in mind the thought that his words would be scrutinised and scientifically analysed thousands of years down the road. Genesis says clearly that God did create the universe, but did not specify (nor did it need to) how he actually did it. God has given man the ability to study, understand and appreciate the world he lives in, and to discover the various laws of nature that God put in place. Evolution is simply the natural mechanism God used to create all life.
2. There is considerable scientific proof suggesting that the earth is old (~14 billion years), and had its beginning in the Big Bang. I will go into more detail on this topic in article 6, but for now, here are some strong reasons:
a. The universe has been observed to be uniformly expanding, suggesting a specific point and time where and when it first started (with great force!)
b. The Big Bang theory predicted that cosmic microwave background radiation should abound in the universe, and this was confirmed in 1964.
c. The Big Bang theory best explains the abundance of light elements in the universe
3. Although many believe that the theory of Evolution is anti-Christian, it actually supports the existence of God in many ways! Increasingly, many scientists are discovering that evolution, although mostly a robust theory, cannot explain how life could have spontaneously formed from non-life. The amount of precision and 'coincidences' that have guided the evolution of life through the millions of years seems to strongly suggest the involvement of an intelligent being. (I'll talk more on this in my next article) This is basis of the "Intelligent Design" movement, which basically says that the universe seems to have been fine-tuned to support life too perfectly to just have been by chance. If you saw a watch on the ground you wouldn't think that it just happened to have formed there by chance - you'd assume instantly that someone designed and made it. The same logic applies to the universe.
What's the big deal?
Whew, let's take a breather and ease the brains a little bit. So far, all we've looked at is what a creationist or theistic evolutionist would say if we held a feather to their side and said "DEFEND YOUR VIEW NOW OR I'LL TICKLE YOU UNCEASINGLY!!" As we've seen, both sides have pretty valid opinions, but one question is begged: does this even matter?
The creationists would immediately say yes, this really does matter, because the way we understand creation affects our Christian view in many ways! If evolution was how God created all life, then suffering, disease and death (necessities in natural selection) would have come before the actual fall of man (see Genesis 3). That seriously goes against the biblical doctrine that sin and death entered the world through Adam, and that Christ came as a "second Adam" to restore that broken relationship with God. Furthermore, creationists would say that if we simply take Genesis 1 & 2 figuratively just so we can reconcile it with modern science, where has the bible's authority gone? What's stopping us from taking everything else in the bible figuratively too?
Theistic evolutionists would say too that yes it's important, because God has given us this ordered and studyable world to live in for a reason. Nature is one of the ways God has revealed Himself to us (Romans 1:18-20); why should we get stuck to old uncertain beliefs when science (a gift that God has given us too) has shown us otherwise?
Let's sum up (finally)
So does this really matter? Do Christians need to take sides? Frankly, it's your choice. It would be immature of me as to bluntly say which view is better. But there are certain basic truths common to both that I believe all Christians should accept and affirm:
God created the universe and all life in it. (And he did a great job!) The bible teaches this clearly, no matter how you interpret it.
Evolution does NOT disprove God, whether or not you think the theory is true.
Let's not take these truths lightly, because it is not rare that Christians are called on to defend them. In my next article, we're going to take a closer look at the theory of evolution, and the problems and challenges it faces. From there we'll consider the reasonableness of assuming the existence of an intelligent designer who might have been there all along, behind (and sometimes within) the scenes.
References, and for more information:
http://www.carm.org/evolution.htm
http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/creation-matters.asp
http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/bible.asp
http://www.creation-evidence.com/
http://www.defendyourfaith.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
Creationism Explored
One view that many Christians hold is that the universe was created in the literal six days as clearly stated in Genesis chapter 1, which renders the theory of evolution as the explanation for the appearing of all life entirely untrue. This view, arguably, was the view that almost all Christians adopted up till the birth of Darwin's theory of evolution, which begged some form of reconciliation with the bible. Creationists maintain that evolution, or the idea of an earth billions of years old is inconsistent with what is explicitly said in the bible. Here are three main reasons why:
1. The bible says that creation was a six day event. If we believe the bible to be the inspired word of God (and there is a LOT of proof for that), then what is written in the bible must be true, even if it seems to go against the popular opinion in the world. If you read the creation account as recorded in Genesis, without any presuppositions, you'd come to the conclusion that the universe and all that's in it was created in six 24-hour days. Although some object by saying that the word "day" in Genesis 1 could simply be referring to a long period of time, a closer look at the original Hebrew text and context indicates that is clearly not the case. Click here for more information on this issue.
2. There is scientific proof suggesting that the earth is young (typified as approx. 10000 years old). Here are some examples, without going into the details, which you can read up for yourself here:
a. The lack of transitional fossils (which should abound if evolution over billions of years is true)
b. The abnormally fast rate of decay of the earth's magnetic field
c. The lack of helium in the earth's atmosphere
d. The lack of sodium in the sea, or mud on the sea floor
e. The unusual observed shape of galaxies and much more.
3. Evolution is a weak theory. Because it occurred over billions of years, tests to prove it cannot be reproduced in a laboratory, and the theory as such is arguably not empirical, as a science. One of its main criticism given by creationists is the problem of "good mutations". Natural selection is driven by the occurrence of random mutations, of which beneficial ones are favoured and thus retained, and subsequently passed on to future generations. The objection raised by critics is this: over 99.9% of all genetic mutations that scientists observe today are harmful to the organism, if not fatal. Beneficial mutations are extremely rare, and virtually never result in actual new information, thus rendering the possibility of a single cell evolving into a complex organism almost zero. The genetic variation that we observe in the world today that allows organisms to adapt to their environments is the result of re-sorting or a loss of genetic information, better termed "devolution". Random mutations, creationists uphold, simply cannot result in the addition of new information.
Side note: One of the main promoters of creationism today is an organisation called Answers in Genesis (AiG), a trustworthy and biblical organisation, in my opinion, whose motto is "Upholding the Authority of the Bible from the Very First Verse". They have produced countless books, videos and a very comprehensive website (answersingenesis.org) in which you'll find answers to almost every question you could possibly have concerning creation and evolution.
Theistic Evolution Explored
The term "theistic evolution" is slightly misleading, because it has come to describe a whole variety of ways in which Christians reconcile evolution with the bible. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm using it to broadly describe the belief that evolution was the main method God used to create all life in this world, regardless of precisely how Genesis chapter 1 (and 2) should be interpreted. Let's now look at the main arguments theistic evolutionists use to defend their view:
1. The Genesis account of creation was not written as a scientific article (and is thus not to be taken literally). Theistic evolutionists do not doubt that the bible is God's word, but do not think that when Moses (as tradition has it) wrote Genesis, he had in mind the thought that his words would be scrutinised and scientifically analysed thousands of years down the road. Genesis says clearly that God did create the universe, but did not specify (nor did it need to) how he actually did it. God has given man the ability to study, understand and appreciate the world he lives in, and to discover the various laws of nature that God put in place. Evolution is simply the natural mechanism God used to create all life.
2. There is considerable scientific proof suggesting that the earth is old (~14 billion years), and had its beginning in the Big Bang. I will go into more detail on this topic in article 6, but for now, here are some strong reasons:
a. The universe has been observed to be uniformly expanding, suggesting a specific point and time where and when it first started (with great force!)
b. The Big Bang theory predicted that cosmic microwave background radiation should abound in the universe, and this was confirmed in 1964.
c. The Big Bang theory best explains the abundance of light elements in the universe
3. Although many believe that the theory of Evolution is anti-Christian, it actually supports the existence of God in many ways! Increasingly, many scientists are discovering that evolution, although mostly a robust theory, cannot explain how life could have spontaneously formed from non-life. The amount of precision and 'coincidences' that have guided the evolution of life through the millions of years seems to strongly suggest the involvement of an intelligent being. (I'll talk more on this in my next article) This is basis of the "Intelligent Design" movement, which basically says that the universe seems to have been fine-tuned to support life too perfectly to just have been by chance. If you saw a watch on the ground you wouldn't think that it just happened to have formed there by chance - you'd assume instantly that someone designed and made it. The same logic applies to the universe.
What's the big deal?
Whew, let's take a breather and ease the brains a little bit. So far, all we've looked at is what a creationist or theistic evolutionist would say if we held a feather to their side and said "DEFEND YOUR VIEW NOW OR I'LL TICKLE YOU UNCEASINGLY!!" As we've seen, both sides have pretty valid opinions, but one question is begged: does this even matter?
The creationists would immediately say yes, this really does matter, because the way we understand creation affects our Christian view in many ways! If evolution was how God created all life, then suffering, disease and death (necessities in natural selection) would have come before the actual fall of man (see Genesis 3). That seriously goes against the biblical doctrine that sin and death entered the world through Adam, and that Christ came as a "second Adam" to restore that broken relationship with God. Furthermore, creationists would say that if we simply take Genesis 1 & 2 figuratively just so we can reconcile it with modern science, where has the bible's authority gone? What's stopping us from taking everything else in the bible figuratively too?
Theistic evolutionists would say too that yes it's important, because God has given us this ordered and studyable world to live in for a reason. Nature is one of the ways God has revealed Himself to us (Romans 1:18-20); why should we get stuck to old uncertain beliefs when science (a gift that God has given us too) has shown us otherwise?
Let's sum up (finally)
So does this really matter? Do Christians need to take sides? Frankly, it's your choice. It would be immature of me as to bluntly say which view is better. But there are certain basic truths common to both that I believe all Christians should accept and affirm:
God created the universe and all life in it. (And he did a great job!) The bible teaches this clearly, no matter how you interpret it.
Evolution does NOT disprove God, whether or not you think the theory is true.
Let's not take these truths lightly, because it is not rare that Christians are called on to defend them. In my next article, we're going to take a closer look at the theory of evolution, and the problems and challenges it faces. From there we'll consider the reasonableness of assuming the existence of an intelligent designer who might have been there all along, behind (and sometimes within) the scenes.
References, and for more information:
http://www.carm.org/evolution.htm
http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/creation-matters.asp
http://answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/bible.asp
http://www.creation-evidence.com/
http://www.defendyourfaith.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang
said
mingdao at
10:30 PM
1 Comments:
has everyone really no comments to make on this article whatsoever? i didn't think i wrote that convincingly :p
By
mingdao, at 3:32 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home