18 – EVOLUTION, PROCESS OR DRAMA?
- Jim Williams
- Dec 9, 2024
- 4 min read
Updated: Dec 17, 2024
December 9, 2024
“I beg you to believe that life is not a process, it's a drama” ― Malcolm Muggeridge
Decades ago – when I was in my 20’s – I thought Theistic Evolution was the “thing” that freed Christians to argue that science and faith/religion were NOT in conflict. And I still see the appeal that Theistic Evolution offers, but I long ago realized that the alleged conflict between Science and the Bible is “fake news.”
Properly understood Science (i.e. the study of cause-and-effect) is simply a method which applies the Principle of Non-contradiction in closed systems.* It is further evidence of the Divine Nature revealed in Creation (again, see Romans 1:20). Since God’s Divine Nature is evident in the very fabric of the scientific method and what it can usefully study, any supposed “conflict” between Science and Religion disappears.
So, in the end, Theistic Evolution does not and cannot pass muster when Scripture is rightly understood and applied, and when it is given its rightful priority.
Now, in the last post I identified several contradictory meanings that make the word “evolution” meaningless, but I neglected to mention the most fundamental contradictory meaning: “evolution” in biology nature, á la Darwin, is impersonal – it is merely a process - whereas, the “evolution” of automobiles – and a whole host of things produced through ingenuity – is personal. It is drama and it is sweet irony that the mere existence of commercials testifies to this!
We must not miss the fact that all creative human endeavours are a form of story-telling. This, of course, reflects the reality that we are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). This fundamentally marks creativity of every kind as intentional; even discoveries and inventions that are “accidental” are not “blind” in the sense that Richard Dawkins writes of a “blind watchmaker.”
While I don’t think that the Bible rules out “evolution,” in the sense of adaptation, it does rule out the impersonal, unplanned, purposeless process of evolution championed by Richard Dawkins and others. The Bible never speaks of one “kind” of plant or animal “evolving” into another “kind;” in Genesis 1:11, 12, 21, 24, and 25 we find the phrase “after its kind” or “after their kind.” This is a caveat which rules out any evolutionary Tree of Life.**
As well, we need to remember where the main focus of the creation story in Genesis 1-2 falls: on the Creator. It is clearly a personal story that begins the drama recorded in the Bible. And this notion is reinforced “in spades” in the Book of Job. When God answers Job out of the whirlwind (Job 38:1-39:30) he gives what is, effectively, a second, more-detailed Creation account. Here is a sample:
22“Have you entered the storehouses of the snow, or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,23 which I have reserved for the time of trouble, for the day of battle and war?
Yahweh then speaks of lions, ravens, mountain goats, the wild ox, the horse, and many more, as his personal creations. There is no Deism here, of a god who simply wound up Creation like a clock and let it run; no, and what God makes, he governs. The God of the Bible is the God of details!
And this brings me to the details we find in DNA. DNA is a language – a language with instructions that control activity within cells. To use familiar images, DNA works like a recipe or an instruction manual. I particularly like the metaphor of knitting instructions because this harkens to Psalm 139: “… you knit me together in my mother’s womb…” (v. 13b) [Perhaps, in this phrase, the Bible anticipates that human beings will one day discover DNA.]
Furthermore, language is the product of intelligence. It is intentional and purposeful, even as it changes. These are necessary conditions for the existence of language and all the evidence supports this view. And, from a Biblical point of view this makes sense…
In the beginning, God created… (Gen. 1:1)
And God spoke… (Gen. 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16, 20, 26)
In the beginning was the Word…. (Jn. 1:1)
Muggeridge is right, life is not merely a process, our lives are part of a great drama that unfolds through creation, fall, human history, redemption of some and judgment for others.
Next time, I want to return to look at more worthless words.
* | A closed system is one where natural events – chains of cause and effect – are repeatable and, therefore, falsifiable. Science can only study closed systems. Open systems that can be studied include: history, philosophy, sociology, theology, and so on. I am indebted to the late Frances Schaeffer for his explanation of closed and open systems. |
** | As a an explanation for living things, any Theory of Evolution has multiple, serious flaws. Those other flaws are beyond the scope of this post. Perhaps I will return to other flaws with Evolution later. |
Comments