โShould it be of concern to Christians that Darwin was never more than a nominal believer? Only if, rejecting universalism, you are concerned about the destiny of his immortal soul. Otherwise โ well, are you concerned whether your surgeon, mechanic, or hair stylist goes to church? Of course not. Your only concern is that she wields a scalpel, wrench, or scissors with know-how and dexterity. So too with a scientist: oneโs only concern should be that he is an honest and skilled practitioner of his craft. And Darwin wasnโt just an able and meticulous biologist, he was a bloody genius. If his theory of evolution by natural selection is the best theory in town that explains the evidence (palaeontological, morphological/taxonomical, molecular/genetic) โ and it is โ deal with it. Of course refute it on empirical grounds if you can, but donโt rubbish it because you donโt like its theological or moral implications, or because you have a political agenda. Fight science with science โ not with the pseudo-science of creationism or the bad science of ID (not to mention the bad theology of both). โ
โ Kim Fabricius, โTen propositions on Darwin and the deityโ










