Creation and Evolution

No topic in the world of science and Christianity has fostered the intensity of discussion and
disharmony with evangelicals as the source of biological diversity. The pages of Perspectives
on Science and Christian Faith (PSCF) reflect the tensions for a community which claims to
value both the Bible and science yet finds it difficult to forge a view on origins that takes in to
account both areas of revelation. The spirited debates on the God and Nature blogs
and ASA listserv demonstrate the current paths of this discussion.

A June 2011 Christianity Today article "The Search for the Historical Adam" and a later web
site editorial "No Adam, No Eve, No Gospel" drew much interest from evangelical publications,
web pages, and bloggers of many persuasions. The CT article described recent advances in genetics
that suggest the need for reconsideration of the traditional Christian understanding of Adam and
Eve. In short, well established genetic studies have concluded that humanity could not have
begun with an initial human pair uniquely given souls by God; rather the complexity of the human
genome requires an original population of 1,000.

While anti-evolution advocates sought to pick holes in the scientific picture, biblical scholars have
sought to develop interpretations that join an evolutionary process with the biblical text. C. John Collins
(Did Adam and Eve Really Exist? Crossway 2011.) finds a contemporary population while Peter Enns, The

Others treat the biblical text in a different way. However most feel the Augustinian picture to be persuasive.
There is certainly much more at stake here than with earlier science-faith impasses in medicine or astronomy.

A Recent News Item: "The 4.4 million-year-old skeleton nicknamed “Ardi” by scientists who
found her remains in Ethiopia show the earliest known ancestor of humans was a lot more like us than
chimps or apes-"- Bloomberg

Do you think this recent scientific revelation will challenge a Christian's faith?"
One Answer

Our page points to PSCF and other sources that focus on the religious significance of the
creation/evolution issue and concerns over the evidence that supports evolution. The ASA has no
official position on evolution; its members hold a diversity of views with varying degrees of intensity.
Advocates and foes of evolution alike have often gone far beyond the science of the subject to advance
various causes. Despite the cries of those who claim a corner on the Truth, he importance of "beliefs"
and "feelings" on all sides reduces the chances for consensus. Too often, would-be authors are not familiar
with current research. Scientists, philosophers and theologians are rightly concerned with those who would
speak learnedly about fields with which they have only a surface knowledge.

Public Perceptions on Origins Today's spirited discussion often pits Christian vs. Christian and scientist
vs. scientist when it comes to points of interpretation. Public debates over education and the "culture wars" keep
the pot boiling. We offer creditable resources from which the reader can draw his/her own position. First, three
recent polls that indicate something of the mood of the American public.

The universe was created in six days as described in Genesis.      29%
Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it.                          43%
Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it.                   28%

May 31-2007 BeliefNet

Another Poll: Darwinian Politics

Which statements reflect your views on the origin of human beings?

1. We evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, and God did not directly guide this process.
2. We evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, but God guided this process.
3. God created us in our present form.

                           DEMOCRATS| REPUBLICANS| ALL
Evolved w/o God       16%                9%                13%
Guided by God         28%               23%                27%
Created by God        51%               66%                55%
Unsure                       5%                 2%                  5%

Source: CBS News/New York Times poll, Nov. 18-21, 2004

Finally:

What do you think of the evidence regarding evolutionary theory? * 29716 responses MSNBC Poll
January 15, 2003

The evidence is so strong that the theory is beyond doubt.     56%
The evidence is not sufficient to support the theory.                      28%
Neither of the above.                                                                     16%

Polls and Research on Public Acceptance of Evolution: Jan 1, 2011

Summary:...in attempting to more broadly understand the role of science in the everyday lives of Americans,
topics such as evolution became pertinent. Their findings show that only 44% of participants had heard or read
about the theory of evolution “a lot.” Additionally, roughly the same percentage of participants stated that e
volutionary theory conflicted with their religion as did those who said that it was mostly compatible with their
religion (42% and 43% respectively). However, 43% of respondents believed that God directly created life.
This starkly contrasts the mere 18% that believed biological life developed over time from simple substances
but God did not guide the process. Interestingly, the study also assesses the degree to which respondents
believe that the theory of evolution is accepted by scientists. A majority, with 53%, believe that the theory is
widely accepted. However, 31% remain skeptical believing that many scientists have serious doubts.

Religious Perspectives on Human Origins 2011 A comparative study There is a range of religious
perspectives concerning human origins and the ways that such perspectives consider the biological evolution
of Homo sapiens. While the views among and within religious traditions on this subject display great diversity,
common themes shared across traditions can also be found.

Joe E Martin, " Compatibility of Major U.S. Christian Denominations with Evolution," Evo Edu
Outreach (2010) 3:420–431 on-line ....An informal survey of major Christian organizations and
denominations in the United States, based mostly on publicly available statements, indicates that in fact most
Christians, as represented by their governing bodies, view evolution as being compatible with their faith. Although
on a worldwide basis this is largely a result of the high number (estimated at 1.2 billion) of adherents to Catholicism,
even in the United States, where Protestants outnumber Catholics and where anti-evolution sentiment runs high,
there is more acceptance than non-acceptance of evolution among Christians, based on statements from their
organizing bodies or spokespersons.

Sixty+ years of ASA publications reflect the paths that English speaking evangelicals have
taken on biological origins. What was essentially a 1950s concordist - literal approach between
the early chapters of Genesis and the science of the day has become a complex matrix of
literary and condordist treatments that take into account ancient Near East (ANE) cultures
and recent advances in the scientific understanding of nature.

Apparent Old Creation: The universe is recent as recorded in the Bible but created to look old
as found by scientific studies. Al Mohler

Evolving Creation (Theistic Evolution): God's activity is typically progressive in time, and
potentially understandable in terms of cause-and-effect sequences of physical or historical
events. K. Miller, Robert, J. Schneider,

"Adam and Eve as Historical People, and Why It Matters," C. John Collins
The best way to account for both the biblical presentation of human life and our own
experience in the world is to suppose that Adam and Eve were real persons, and the
forebears of all other human beings. The biblical presentation concerns not simply
the story in Genesis and the biblical passages that refer to it, but also the larger
biblical storyline, which deals with God’s good creation invaded by sin, for which
God has a redemptive plan; Israel’s calling to be a light to the nations; and the
church’s prospect of successfully bringing God’s light to the whole world. The biblical
presentation further concerns the unique role and dignity of the human race, which
is a matter of daily experience for everyone: all people yearn for God and need him,
depend on him to deal with their sinfulness, and crave a wholesome community
for their lives to flourish.

"Genesis and the Genome: Genomics Evidence for Human-Ape Common Ancestry and Ancestral
Hominid Population Sizes," Dennis R. Venema The relatively new and rapidly expanding field of comparative
genomics provides a wealth of data useful for testing the hypothesis that humans and other forms of life share
common ancestry. Numerous independent lines of genomics evidence strongly support the hypothesis that our
species shares a common ancestor with other primates. Additional lines of evidence also indicate that our species
has maintained a population size of at least several thousand individuals since our speciation from the ancestors
of other great apes. This article will provide an overview of genomics evidence for common ancestry and hominid
population sizes, and briefly discuss the implications of these lines of evidence for scientific concordist approaches
to the Genesis narratives.

Recent Genetic Science and Christian Theology on Human Origins: An “Aesthetic Supralapsarianism”
John R. Schneider Recent genomic science strongly supports the theory of common ancestry. To classical Protestants, particularly, this theory seems incompatible with Scripture, most especially with the “historical Fall,” which Protestants presume to be manifestly biblical and so have cemented it securely into their confessions and theology as a whole. Nevertheless, John Schneider proposes that it is important for traditional Protestants to consider alternatives to this essentially “Augustinian” view. He invites readers to examine Eastern thinking (mainly in Irenaeus of Lyon) together with a minority of Protestants (such as Karl Barth and supralapsarian Calvinists), for whom the Incarnation and Atonement are the purpose of creation from the beginning. Their understanding differs from the execution of divine “Plan B,” as implied by the Augustinian western version of an unintended “fall” from utopian first conditions. Schneider appeals to a fresh reading of the book of Job in support of an “aesthetic supralapsarianism,” which sustains Protestant virtues of biblical authority, divine sovereignty, and grace, while opening avenues to compatibility with evolutionary science.

"After Adam: Reading Genesis in an Age of Evolutionary Science," Daniel C. Harlow
Recent research in molecular biology, primatology, sociobiology, and phylogenetics
indicates that the species Homo sapiens cannot be traced back to a single pair of
individuals, and that the earliest human beings did not come on the scene in anything
like paradisal physical or moral conditions. It is therefore difficult to read Genesis 1–3
as a factual account of human origins. In current Christian thinking about Adam and
Eve, several scenarios are on offer. The most compelling one regards Adam and Eve
as strictly literary figures—characters in a divinely inspired story about the imagined
past that intends to teach theological, not historical, truths about God, creation,
and humanity. Taking a nonconcordist approach, this article examines Adam and Eve
as symbolic literary figures from the perspective of mainstream biblical scholarship,
with attention both to the text of Genesis and ancient Near Eastern parallels. Along the
way, it explains why most interpreters do not find the doctrines of the Fall and original sin
in the text of Genesis 2–3, but only in later Christian readings of it. This article also
examines briefly Paul’s appeal to Adam as a type of Christ. Although a historical Adam
and Eve have been very important in the Christian tradition, they are not central to
biblical theology as such. The doctrines of the Fall and original sin may be reaffirmed
without a historical Adam and Eve, but invite reformulation given the overwhelming
evidence for an evolving creation.

Biblical/Theological Papers (many more articles may be found via Google from our home
page)

Junghyung, Kim, "Naturalistic versus Eschatological Theologies of Evolution," PSCF
63 (June 2011):95.

ASA/CSCA
Newsletter

Thomas Wynn, " Into the mind of a Neanderthal" New Scientist 18 January 2012

A Ladder to the Protein Moon

Archaelogical Finds of Early Humans

John Noble Wilford, The Human Family Tree Has Become a Bush With Many Branches
NYTimes, Sep. 2007

On Darwin’s ‘On the Origin of Species’

OLIVIA JUDSON, The Origin of Darwin (February 12, 2009)
A look back at the life of Charles Darwin, who was born 200 years ago.
His work transformed our understanding of the planet and of ourselves.

Seeing the Risks of Humanity’s Hand in Species Evolution (February 10, 2009)

Essay: Darwinism Must Die So That Evolution May Live (February 10, 2009)

Crunching the Data for the Tree of Life (February 10, 2009)

Genes Offer New Clues in Old Debate on Species’ Origins (February 10, 2009)

Findings: Darwin the Comedian. Now That’s Entertainment! (February 10, 2009)

John Lennox, Seven Days That Divide the World: The Beginning According to
Genesis and Science (2011)

ASA/CSCA Newsletter