God of Change and God of Glory: Evolution and Faith

SpiritQuest: Faith and the Life of the Mind

September 12^th Evening Presentation

God of Change and God of Glory: Evolution and Faith

Between the sensationalized and politicized poles of creationism and atheistic scientism there exists an intriguing range of conversations exploring the intelligibility of the universe, evolution and adaptation of species, theological reflection and scientific investigation.

1.   Brief background into the early history of the development of the theory of evolution:

a.   “Charles Robert Darwin was born on the same day as Abraham Lincoln, February 12, 1809 in Shrewsbury, England. He developed an interest in natural history while studying first medicine, then theology, at university. From 1831 to 1836 Darwin served as naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle on a British science expedition around the world. In South America Darwin found fossils of extinct animals that were similar to modern species. On the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific Ocean he noticed many variations among plants and animals of the same general type as those in South America. The expedition visited places around the world, and Darwin studied plants and animals everywhere he went, collecting specimens for further study.

b.   Upon his return to London Darwin conducted thorough research of his notes and specimens. His research led him consider how the variety of animal and plant species had developed and changed over a long course of time. Out of this study grew several related theories: one, evolution did occur (and by the way, Darwin didn’t use the word evolution until the very end of his book The Origin of Species. “Evolution” simply means the process of development and change within a system or event – the phrase Darwin used was “descent with modification through variation and natural selection”); two, evolutionary change was gradual, requiring thousands to millions of years; three, the primary mechanism for evolution was a process called natural selection; and four, the millions of species alive today arose from a single original life form through a branching process called "specialization." (Adapted from “Charles Darwin: British Naturalist” at http://www2.lucidcafe.com/lucidcafe/library/96feb/darwin.html).

c.    Aware of how these ideas were viewed as being heretical by many people, he delayed publication of his ideas until 1859, when he got wind of another scientist who was about to publish similar ideas. All this from a man who had studied for the ministry. Well he knew the uproar this would cause within a society steeped in the Christian faith, but also deeply immersed in a growing scientific revolution. This uproar continues to this day, and at its core reside issues concerning the origin of human life, the meaning of human life and experience, and the relationship between human knowledge and religious faith.

2.   Basic features of Evolutionary theory

a.   Define “theory:”

A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it. Therefore, theories can be disproven. Basically, if evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, then the hypothesis can become accepted as a good explanation of a phenomenon. One definition of a theory is to say it's an accepted hypothesis. (from Anna Marie Helmenstine, "Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions" at About.com)
In the sciences, a scientific theory (also called an empirical theory) comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena. (from Wikipedia: "Scientific theory")

b.   Evolution as historical fact, and as a theoretical mechanism (see Kenneth R. Miller, Finding Darwin’s God, pp. 53-54)

                        i.     Fact - Well demonstrated through fossil records of changes and variations – this was known and documented long before Darwin

                        ii.     Mechanism – what Darwin provided as an explanatory structure for this history, which provided a mechanism for that “descent with modification:” mutation, variation and natural selection.

                         iii.     Evolutionary theory has been expanded upon through the fields of genetics, biochemistry, ecology, anthropology, etc., which supply further explanatory and descriptive mechanisms that make evolution a more coherent and cogent explanation.

c.    The evidence continues to mount for Evolution as both an accurate description of how the various species of plants and animals have come to be what and where they are, but also how they change and adapt or die out over time. The basic ideas of the Theory of Evolution form the basis of the Science of biology, and the various fields and subdisciplines of biology, such as genetics. Biochemistry, ecology, botany, zoology, as well as the study and practice of medicine arise out of and are dependent upon its tenets and explanations. Evolutionary Theory not only postulates that changes have occurred across long periods of time, but it provides a mechanism for that change in genetics, an explanation for the discoveries of archaeology, paleoanthropology and paleontology, correlates its explanations to discoveries in geology, and explains how animal and plant breeding is possible. There is more evidence for Evolution than there is for Black holes or for the existence of the planet Pluto (my own hyperbolic analogy).

3.   Problems regarding the Theory of Evolution and Christian Faith

a.   What might you discern to be some of the tensions and non-congruences between Evolution and Christian faith?

b.   What models of God and human origins are we working with?

For an in-depth, and some would say definitive, treatment of the issues o the use of models in science and religion, see Ian Barbour's, Myths, Models and Paradigms, which can be read online at Religion Online.

c.    There are many who feel that this well-established Scientific Theory is a direct threat to Christian faith and doctrine. This perception of threat usually occurs at two points. The first relates to its conflict with a literal reading of at least one of the two creation stories in Genesis, and the second is a result of the quasi- or pseudo-philosophical assertions of a few prominent evolutionists, such as Richard Dawkins, that evolution does away with the need to believe in a God, that everything arose as a result of randomly ordered processes that are completely explainable in materialistic scientific terms. In other words, there is no need for a supernatural explanation for the origin of things when there is a coherent and well-tried natural explanation. This is an extreme view, and is held by very few scientists in total, but it serves as a sufficient launching pad for those believe that there is a cultural war being waged against the Christian faith, or more precisely, against their particular interpretation on that faith. This, of course, is the true crux of the tension and struggle, but this vocal section of the Christian faith has seized the attention of the masses, has mobilized a political campaign to further its doctrines and interpretation of the Christian faith, and so here we are talking about these issues this morning.

d.   Appearing in various guises and reflecting a diversity of opinion and doctrine within its own ranks, it is commonly known as Creationism or more recently as Intelligent Design. The basic political strategy has been to try and convince school boards that its ideas and doctrines should be taught in public schools as an alternative theory to the theory of Evolution, saying that Evolution “is just a theory, not established fact.” However, this semantic sleight-of-hand ignores the fact that a scientific “theory” is not opinion or hypothesis. Theory is a systematic explanation for a whole constellation of observations, facts, data and discoveries. Evolutionary theory is therefore the best scientific explanation of a wide variety of discoveries in virtually every field of biology as well as its application in medicine.

e.   Basic to intelligent Design is the idea that the complexity of the universe cannot be properly or satisfactorily explained by scientific research or description of discovered phenomena. There are gaps in our understanding for which the idea of an intelligent designer or a creator provides the best explanation. The problem with this “God of the Gaps” approach, of course, is that science continues to fill in the explanatory gaps, which leads to an ever-shrinking God.

f.     Other problems relate to the idea that evolution teaches species change and adapt and even die out if they are unable to remain viable in changed circumstances. Most creationists and some adherents of Intelligent Design insist upon the uniqueness of human origin, and the immutability of species. “God created everything just the way it is now, and nothing has changed.” However, many Intelligent Design advocates, such as William Dembski do believe that scientific cosmologies and many tenets of evolutionary theory are correct, but maintain that these can be arguments for a designer, and being theists, call that designer "God." their basic contention is that they are up front about this call. See Dembski's self-defense.

g.   Related to this is the issue of static versus dynamic creation – is God still creating? Is the process of God’s creative design continuous, or was it only in the past? And of course, there are many other issues. These give you an idea of just of few of the ideas that are perceived to be at stake.

4.   Issue of models and metaphors (see above link to Ian Barbour)

5.   What model of God are we working with?

a.   Stephen Hawking’s recent book, The Grand Design – what God is he really saying we don’t need? Is it not what many call “the God of the gaps?” That is, we have scientific explanations for a certain biological or cosmological process, but there are gaps in our understanding of what occurs. So we fill in that gap with the explanation of God doing something. But then further scientific investigation uncovers the mechanism for what happens in the gap. Increasingly, “God” gets squeezed out of the picture, until there are no gaps to fill – and thus no need for “God” to fill them.

b.   I submit that most of the scientists who reject God have a very unsophisticated, 3^rd Grade level view of God. Do we really conceptualize God as being the big bearded Grandpa in the Sky?

6.   Congruences and incongruences, and points of connection

a.   Other modes, a la Ian Barbour: Conflict, Independence, Dialogue and Integration. In this series I am arguing for Dialogue and Integration.

b.   Incongruences:

               i.     Be careful of the conclusions you jump to when making your argument. If God is not the hypothesis you are trying to prove, do not claim to have disproven the need for God if God is not part of the original set of conditions and elements under condition.

c.    Congruences

7.   Is a reductionistic explanation really a satisfying explanation of our experiences here on Earth? Or is it more satisfying to understand that we have a multiplicity of ways of experiencing and exploring life on Earth and in the Universe, and each has validity?