1. A plain reading of the Bible doesn\u2019t allow for it.<\/p>\n
2. Evolution makes it difficult to understand Adam, the Fall, and sin (and thus the work of Christ).<\/p>\n
3. Micro-Evolution is fine, but Macro-Evolution is just an unproven, unscientific theory<\/p>\n
4. Creation bears the marks of Intelligent Design, not blind, purposeless evolution<\/p>\n
5. Evolution is driven by a secular, worldly agenda<\/p>\n
You can read Brad\u2019s thoughts on these five objections on the original post at his blog (5 Common Objections to Evolutionary Creationism<\/a><\/em>). Here I\u2019ll add some comments of my own along with references to some of the books that I\u2019ve looked at over the years.<\/p>\n 1. Creation and the Bible.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n A small selection of helpful books:<\/p>\n The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by John Walton (This one was a game-changer in that has helped many to see the biblical story of creation in a different, but completely biblical, light.)<\/p>\n Science, Creation and the Bible: Reconciling Rival Theories of Origins<\/strong><\/em><\/a> by Richard F. Carlson and Tremper Longman III.<\/p>\n In the Beginning \u2026 We Misunderstood<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Johnny V. Miller and John M. Soden<\/p>\n Scripture and the Authority of God: How to Read the Bible Today<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by N.T. Wright (Not so much about creation as about the authority of Scripture.)<\/p>\n Scripture and Cosmology: Reading the Bible Between the Ancient World and Modern Science<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Kyle Greenwood<\/p>\n 2. Adam, the Fall, Sin and Atonement.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n For other people the issue is more deeply theological. Christ redeems us from sin and death. Romans 5:12 leads off the key passage: Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned<\/em>.This leads to a number of objections: (1) Death through sin doesn\u2019t seem consistent with death as a mechanism of creation. (2)\u00a0 Sin is not \u201cnatural\u201d (as evolutionary theory suggests) but an aberration introduced by the rebellion of a sinless man. (3) The comparison of one man Adam with one man Christ requires Adam and the Fall.<\/p>\n It is not clear to me that the \u201ctraditional\u201d (esp. reformed)\u00a0 interpretation of some of these ideas is the most faithful to the entire biblical story. It is clear, however, that humans are a mess and that the incarnation \u2013 God become man \u2013 is essential to the redemption of mankind.\u00a0 This is a conversation we need to have and the theological considerations require an open mind and charity as we move forward.<\/p>\n We\u2019ve discussed a number of books on Adam over the years. Perhaps the most helpful is:<\/p>\n The Lost World of Adam and Eve: Genesis 2-3 and the Human Origins Debate<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by John Walton<\/p>\n I also found the following (more academic) books very helpful:<\/p>\n Beginnings: Ancient Christian Readings of the Biblical Creation Narratives<\/strong><\/em><\/a> by Peter Bouteneff<\/p>\n The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by J. Richard Middleton<\/p>\n Adam\u2019s Ancestors: Race, Religion, and the Politics of Human Origins<\/strong><\/em><\/a> by David Livingstone<\/p>\n The Nature of Creation: Examining the Bible and Science<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Mark Harris<\/p>\n Finally, Pete Enns has become controversial for some, but this book presents a helpful discussion whether you agree with his conclusions or not.\u00a0 I found the sections on the Old Testament especially thought provoking.<\/p>\n The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn\u2019t Say about Human Origins<\/a><\/em><\/strong> by Peter Enns<\/p>\n 3. Micro-evolution versus macro-evolution.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n Dr. B. K. (Bev) Mitchell,\u00a0 retired biology professor from the University of Alberta, off and on commenter here, recently put together a list of books on evolution for theologians posted by Pete Enns at his blog: So, theologian, want to know more about biology? Sure you do. Here are some books<\/em><\/a>. Of these I\u2019d particularly recommend Denis Noble\u2019s The Music of Life: Biology Beyond Genes<\/a><\/em><\/strong> and\u00a0 Denis Alexander\u2019s\u00a0 The Language of Genetics: An Introduction<\/a><\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n Several Christian biology professors have also written useful books.\u00a0 Darrel Falk\u2019s Coming to Peace with Science<\/a><\/em><\/strong> and Gary Fugle\u2019s Laying Down Arms to Heal the Creation-Evolution Divide<\/a><\/strong><\/em> contain good lay-level introductions.<\/p>\n 4. Creation bears the marks of Intelligent Design, not blind, purposeless evolution.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n While many secular biologists will claim that evolution is blind and purposeless, this is not my view \u2013 or that of other Christians who accept evolutionary Creation.\u00a0 As a Christian I certainly believe that God created the world intelligently and with design. There is a reason why we are here and a purpose to creation that goes beyond the merely material.\u00a0 But this doesn\u2019t rule out evolutionary processes.\u00a0 It is a false dichotomy to distinguish between God\u2019s action and natural processes. God can and does work through natural processes.<\/p>\n I could list a dozen or more books here, but will restrict myself to four:<\/p>\n God\u2019s Universe<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Owen Gingerich<\/p>\n A Fine-Tuned Universe: The Quest for God in Science and Theology<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Alister McGrath<\/p>\n Life\u2019s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Simon Conway Morris. (This one is a bit academic, but excellent content.)<\/p>\n God and the Cosmos: Divine Activity in Space, Time and History<\/a><\/strong><\/em> by Harry Lee Poe and Jimmy H. Davis<\/p>\n 5. Evolution is driven by a secular, worldly agenda.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n As Christians we should be concerned about the secular trends in the world.\u00a0 We face many threats and influences from the world drawing us away from God. The lure of money, sex, and power. The consumerism of our culture. Ambition and pride. Secular materialism as a worldview. Thing is, this secular \u201cagenda\u201d isn\u2019t what drives evolutionary biology. Evolutionary biology is accepted because it provides a coherent framework connecting vast amount of otherwise unconnected knowledge.<\/p>\n Scientists, being human, can use the concepts of evolutionary biology as a means to further a secular materialist world view. Others of us see an evolutionary creation \u2013 not secular materialism at all, but the handiwork of God.<\/p>\n Combating the secular trends in the world by opposing evolutionary biology will be as effective as fighting mosquitoes by eliminating all sources of fresh water, turning the country into a desert. It cannot be done and the attempt serves to exacerbate our problems. Focusing on this issue avoids the real problems, serves to set Christians up for a conflict if they learn more biology and to keep many educated non-Christians from even considering the possibility that Christian faith is the way forward.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t have any specific book recommendations here, but Daniel Harrell\u2019s excellent and entertaining\u00a0 book Nature\u2019s Witness: How Evolution Can Inspire Faith\u00a0<\/a><\/strong><\/em> provides an engaging and conversational look at the issues that evolution raises for faith. This is an excellent introductory book.\u00a0 The Language of Science and Faith: Straight Answers to Genuine Questions<\/a> <\/strong><\/em>by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins is another excellent starting point.<\/p>\n![\"apollo08_earthrise\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/40\/2015\/05\/apollo08_earthrise-300x226.jpg\")
<\/a>Brad found this objection raised less often than he expected, but perhaps that reflects the sophistication of the audience at the ETS meeting. Objections grounded in the interpretation of scripture are the most common objections that I\u2019ve heard.\u00a0 Even those who accept, or want to accept, the science, struggle with what this means for the interpretation and reliability of Scripture. As a result I find it essential to start with the Bible, and in the Bible to start with Genesis and the other creation texts. A substantial number of the books I\u2019ve read and posts I\u2019ve written over the years focus on Scripture and on the Old Testament in particular.\u00a0 (You can find an index of my posts by clicking on Science and Faith<\/a><\/em> under the Jesus Creed banner at the top of the page.)\u00a0 Ironically I got an angry response from one commenter who claimed that it was deceitful to start with Scripture when making an argument for evolutionary creation.\u00a0 I don\u2019t think there is any place else where we as Christians should start.\u00a0 I find that a careful reading makes the \u201cplain sense\u201d interpretation of biblical creation hard to defend unless we pick and choose between texts (e.g. ignoring pillars, firmament and storehouses while defending immediate creation of species).\u00a0 It is clear that the \u201cplain sense\u201d interpretation leads to an ancient Near Eastern cosmology that we know to be untrue.\u00a0 I think we need a literary interpretation that takes into account the thought world of the ancient Near Eastern context and the genres and literary conventions of the time.<\/p>\n![\"michelangelo's](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/40\/2013\/06\/michelangelos-Adam-2-300x153.jpg\")
<\/a>This should really be divided into several sections although they are related to each other.\u00a0\u00a0 For many people the issue here is the same as in the first objection.\u00a0 A \u201cplain sense\u201d reading of scripture supports the existence of a unique Adam progenitor of the human race and we should accept this. However, it is not clear that a plain sense reading really does support this view of Adam. Parts of Genesis 4 and 5 make substantially more sense under the assumption of a population of humans.<\/p>\n![\"Whales\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/40\/2015\/08\/Whales-300x210.jpg\")
<\/a>This is a distinction without meaning, the kind of thing that causes biologists (and some of the rest of us) to tear their hair out.\u00a0 Now, do we really want a world populated only by bald biologists? The kinds of small scale changes we can easily observe and understand are powered by the same kinds of processes that result in much more fundamental changes on much longer time scales. There are many lines of evidence for macro evolution but the most persuasive are found in the fossil record and in the genetic material of different organisms. Macro-evolution is micro-evolution over long time scales. Each change is micro (or the organism wouldn\u2019t survive) but the cumulative effect can be large.\u00a0 This objection generally reflects a misunderstanding of evolution (as do jokes about crocoducks \u2026).<\/p>\n