Faith After Darwin in Kenneth

Faith After Darwin

In Kenneth R. Miller's book Finding Darwin's God: a Scientist's Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution, he discusses the traditionally antagonistic relationship between the concept of evolution and the belief in God. He argues that the two things may not be mutually exclusive. Believing in evolution and believing in God can both occur provided that the individual reevaluate these two terms in less dogmatic terms than previous generations understand either. Those who believe in the word of the Bible or other holy texts and interpret these words as dogma without any room for interpretation are unable to see this, as are those who hold that evolution automatically dictates that there is no such thing as God because science and religion cannot coexist.

The theory of evolution was originally met with cries of disdain and accusations of heresy lobbied against Charles Darwin. Essentially, of course, the theory of evolution states that creatures develop overtime and adapt to changes in their environment in order to survive. Favorable traits are passed on genetically and less favorable ones are eventually removed from the gene pool. Theologians argue that God designs creatures intentionally and that similar creatures are not the result of evolutionary change, but that God merely creates a new animal. One example that Miller points to would be the development of the eye which can be traced throughout generations to see minute alterations until there are two separate eye types. This is something that scientists state can only be explained by evolution. The religious perspective of design theory posits that "by themselves, the individual parts or structures of a complex organ are useless" (Miller 2007,-page 135). While a creature might evolve some part over time in reaction to environmental change, they would not be able to adapt whole organs from original single-celled organisms. Scientists argue that this is precisely the case, that as the creature evolves, it requires more organs to fulfill functions which were originally successfully performed by its the components of its single cell.

Evolution is no longer limited in its scope to the field of biology, but has been incorporated into nearly all avenues of human endeavor. For example, people can evolve and change in order to better adapt to their individual learning environment. This is seen in psychological studies where children adapt in order to survive hostile environments. Modern scientists have utilized the concepts of evolution to genetically modify organisms which will produce foods which are immune or at the very least highly resistant to weather issues, soil issues, or consumers. There is a type of wheat which is considered a genetically modified organism (GMO) which was designed to be resistant to pests who tend to feast on traditionally grown wheat crops. By studying how the plant attracts the insect species, scientists have been able to modify the genes of the plant to repel the creature. These parent plants will then pass on their genetic code to future generations, forcing the evolution of the plants. In what could be argued a victory for both sides, some insects are starting to appear who have developed an adaptation so that they now can feed upon the GMO wheat. Those who support evolution would state that this is an exact example of an animal evolving to survive while those who support the religious intelligent design theory would argue that it is a reaction of the almighty to man's interference. In this we can see both evolution at work and potentially the hand of God if we choose to see it that way. Seeing how things change helps human beings understand the world as we know it and reconcile the world as it is now with how the world used to be.

It is likely that the reason the two sides of the argument fight so vehemently is that they do not see any way in which their ideas can both be true. The fear on both sides is that if one is right then it necessarily means that the other side is completely wrong. If there is evolution, then God does not exist. If God exists, then scientific theories such as evolution are immaterial or even nonexistent. However, there is a way to understand God even in a world where Darwin's theory of evolution is correct. In his book, Miller quotes the National Academy of Sciences. They stated:

At the root of the apparent conflict between some religious and evolution is a misunderstanding of the critical difference between religious and scientific ways of knowing. Religions and science answer different questions about the world. Whether there is a purpose to the universe or a purpose for human existence are not questions for science. Religious and scientific ways of knowing have played, and will continue to play, significant roles in human history (Miller 2007,-page 169).

This statement is essentially correct. For most of the questions that people have to ask, the answers can be found in either the field of science or in the realm of the religious. However, there is some overlap as in the case of evolution because it poses the question about how life on earth began. Some would say that either creatures were created by evolution started by the Big Bang or that intelligent design by an all-knowing all-powerful God created us all. There is a way where both could be the case. If the creatures of the world started as amoebas, one could argue that something very powerful had to start that process. Some entity, something had to start the ball rolling. In this area is where we can reconcile the existence of evolution and the existence of God.