Could God Have Used Evolution?
by Sean McDowell
"Why couldn't God have just used evolution as his means of creating the world? Why do many Christians consider it a threat to their faith? What's the big deal?" This is one of the most commonly asked questions about the origins debate, especially from young people. Many people wonder why Christians don't simply accept Darwin's theory as the means through which God created and then get on with it.
This is a question I have wrestled with quite profoundly. I have asked many theologians, scientists, and philosophers the question, Is Darwinian evolution compatible with Christianity? After much thought and research, the conclusion I have come up with is that they are not compatible. To accept Darwinian evolution would be a grave mistake. Let me explain.
Christianity and Darwinian Evolution: An Oxymoron!
The reason the two cannot be wedded together is actually rather simple: Darwinian evolution (as you may recall from 9th grade Biology class) is a blind, undirected, purposelessness process. As Richard Dawkins regularly points out, evolution is a chance process that has no end-goal in mind. On the other hand, when we design something it's no longer blind and it's no longer undirected...it's purposeful. Thus, to say God used evolution is an oxymoron (designed-chance) like "Christian-atheist," "jumbo-shrimp," or "Microsoft Works."
Think about it this way. There are two ways to build a computer (which, by the way, is far less complex than a single human cell). One option is to throw the parts on the ground and let natural processes alone do the work. Maybe with wind, rain, and a big earthquake the computer will be assembled by itself. If so, this would be a chance process. Most reasonable people will recognize that this will never happen, but it does illustrate how something could in principle be constructed by chance (ignoring the question of where the parts came from in the first place!)
But there is another way to build a computer: design. A computer designer makes individual parts and places them in the right arrangement so it will perform certain functions. A computer designer has a purposeful, directed plan for the computer...it is not the result of chance.
Can you see how this relates to evolution? God could either design the world or let it go by chance, but not both. As soon as God guides the process (design) it is no longer natural (chance). It is simply illogical to claim that God used evolution as his means of creating the world, for it would be an oxymoron: designed-chance.
Now, if by "evolution" we simply mean common descent, then sure, God could've used common descent. Common descent refers to the idea that all species are derived from a common ancestor millions of years ago (i.e., you are related to your pet snail!). God could have created all organisms with a common ancestor. But here's the key point: His mechanism would not be natural selection acting on random mutation, for that is an un-designed process.
Consider Corvettes as an example. Corvettes have a common ancestor (the first year they were made). As Corvettes are designed over multiple years, we see similarities and commonalities with each successive model. But, of course, Corvettes were designed. If that's what we mean by evolution, then sure, God could've used it. Many proponents of intelligent design actually believe this (for the record, I don't).
Can Christians Believe in Evolution?
So, can someone be a Christian and believe in evolution? Sure. You can be a Christian and believe in all sorts of things that are false! But the real question is, Can Christianity be true and Darwinian evolution be true? I don't think they can.
I think a lot of people want to find a way to reconcile the two because they believe the evidence for Darwinian evolution is so overwhelming that they want to "save room" for their faith by saying maybe God just used evolution. So, they want to maintain their faith without giving it up. But as I write in Understanding Intelligent Design (Harvest House, 2008), you don't have to! There's another scientifically and philosophically rigorous theory that is much more compatible with the historic Christian faith. You can check out the first chapter for free at www.seanmcdowell.org
Comments
Edgar Andrew on Oct 26, 2009 said...
Your readers might also like to check out my own new book “Who made God? Searching for a theory of everything”. Written by a physicist and former university dean, the book explores ‘the hypothesis of God’ as it is presented in the Bible. Author Bill Bryson writes “I am immensely grateful [for the book]” and the Principal of London Theological Seminary says, “Richard Dawkins has more than met his match”. Available from http://www.epbooks.org or http://www.Amazon.com.
cindy jada on Nov 28, 2009 said...
One thing that is not typically discussed is that origins within the apostles dedicated to the Jesus lore were focused on converting Jews to this new Jewish based sect. For example only those who remained within the Jewish dietary requirements and were circumcised were welcome. This remained fairly constant until Paul came along and took his conversion efforts from Africa to Europe and the Gentiles and in doing so dropped many requirements such as the dietary restrictions and being circumcised.
Inspirational Christian
Edgar Andrews on Nov 28, 2009 said...
Cindy: Just a note on your comment. While what you say was true initially, it was in fact the apostle Peter who first took the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles (non-Jews). You need to read Acts chapters 9, 10 and 11 to get the full picture.
Ashley Reinecke on Jan 22, 2010 said...
I disagree. Using Richard Dawkins’ quote as the single representative for Darwinian evolution makes it easy to scrutinize the theory. However, Richard Dawkins is not the face of evolution, the world around us is. The evidence supporting evolution is irrefutable. However, that does not mean that God is not the creator. How can any human come to the conclusion that evolution is purposeless? It is impossible to come to such a conclusion.
Everything living on this planet has come from a single ancestor—it is a proven fact that you cannot un-prove with faith. My personal belief is that God IS that common ancestor. We are all descendants of God. I don’t think any Christian will argue against that.
Russ on Jan 25, 2010 said...
Glad to see we are back on the subject. I agree with Ashley. I would also like to add that we are all conscious co-creators in the Great Play that God set into motion. And when we (the royal we - including plants, animals and rocks) become aware of a need to change (ie evolve) it is God becoming aware of a need to evolve. There can be no separation. We can say we are individuals with individual consciousnesses. However, there is One consciousness ultimately… the Creator, which we, being created in his image, are participating and observing. Creation is not complete. It continues. And to say that it does not evolve is ludicrous.
departmentofhealth on Mar 02, 2010 said...
Nope. I don’t agree.
Random mutation only seems random because we cannot see a guiding hand predict it. It is actually caused, by sunlight, radiation, the action of chemicals. Could God be directing these? Yes. Could he have set up the universe such that they would act in such and such a way to produce such and such a mutuation? Yes.
Natural selection only seems blind because we cannot see a guiding hand or predict it. Could God be directing it, such that it is really “unnatural selection” only we don’t know about it? Yes. Could God have set the universe up such that selection would act in this way or that, to select this or that creature? Yes.
The fact that Dawkins doesn’t mention this is because he doesn’t believe it. That doesn’t mean he is representative of the scientific community, or a scientific consensus. He doesn’t believe that God “made the universe make itself” through evolution. But many do.
Russ on Sep 11, 2009 said...
Your argument totally mixes ways of thinking around. You use the word “chance” as if such a thing exists. If you are truly a God believer, then you know there is no such thing as chance… at least in the form you are using it. God did not create any purposelessness processes. If Darwin didn’t give God sufficient credit in his explanation of his observations, it does not mean his observations are necessarily false. Darwin was not an atheist, and when he described change taking place, he very well may have seen Gods hand in these changes (has anyone ask him?). Intelligent design and evolution are completely compatible if your thinking is consistent. When you mix your metaphors, your ideas become meaningless. You use the word “descent” to describe the common ancestry theory, but how is this different from evolution. Just as a human designer makes many models of his creation, then makes adaptations and model improvements over time after observing the way it is used and its popularity and so on… Why is it not possible that God too might observe His own creation and make design adjustments. Who are we to judge what method He uses? God can do whatever He wants.