Perhaps it is one of the greatest debates of our time, but Darwinism and

contemporary evolution do not necessarily disprove the existence of God. Various

interpretations of both the Book of Genesis and Darwin’s On the Origins of Species

are perhaps to blame for this dispute, but through a careful analysis of each text,

we will find a possibility for reconciliation between science and religion. By testing

this possibility, we will find that it has reasonable grounds for debate, and that it is

able to withstand some of the most severe criticisms from both atheists and

Christians alike. From this trial-by-fire we will come to see that it is indeed

scientifically and religiously possible to believe in both evolution and God.

Darwin’s idea of natural selection is considered by many to be the

cornerstone of all modern biology—more specifically the modern theory of

evolution. Darwin defines natural selection as the “preservation of favorable

variations and the rejection of injurious variations” (Darwin, 144). Variations define

one species from another and all result “from the struggle for life” (132). All living

organisms—plants, animals and microscopic life-forms—share in the struggle for life

or existence. They battle the climate, competition, food supply and other factors—in

varying degrees—simply to survive. The struggle for existence and the variations it

produces results in natural selection. Natural selection preserves the favourable

variations which make one species more likely to survive than another. To survive, a

species must “increase in numbers” (136). Species with variations that are

favourable are more likely to produce offspring while those with injurious variations

are less likely. Either way, both injurious and favourable variations “will…be

inherited…by offspring” (133). The offspring will also have the same chance of

survival as their parents. Over time, the species with injurious variations is more

likely to become extinct, while those with favourable variations continue existing.

No one can easily deny that variations exist, but how and why they exist is a

fundamental question. Darwin himself writes that “Our ignorance of the laws of
 2

variation is profound” (200)—something quite understandable in a world ignorant of

genetics. He may not be sure exactly why variations occur, but his observations

demonstrate that “a cause…must exist” (201). Darwin’s goal is not to explain the

origin of variations but rather the origin of species through the natural selection of

favourable variations.

Darwinism has had a history of controversy with Christianity which still

continues today. Christians have become somewhat divided over Darwinism and the

contemporary theory of evolution. According to the Bible, “God created…every

living thing…each according to its kind” (Gen. 1:21, 24). All Christians can agree

with this: that the origin of species and the origin of every living organism is God.

Christians can also agree that “God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it

was very good” (Gen. 1:31)—it was perfect. What is dividing many Christians is how

Genesis is interpreted. For example, what exactly does ‘good’ or ‘perfect’ imply?

Fundamentalists argue for a literal interpretation of Genesis, that God created the

world and everything in it exactly as Genesis describes. Since natural selection and

its injurious variations suggest the gradually improvement of species (imperfection)

as opposed to their instantaneous creation (perfection), fundamentalists reject

evolution.

Many atheists like to use Darwinism and evolution as a weapon against

fundamentalist beliefs. Many atheists question: if God created the world and

everything in it within six days, then why does science determine it to be formed

over millions of years? Why have we found transitional fossils which show that

organisms do evolve over long periods of time? Why are these fossils much older

than any human fossil? These questions of ‘why?’ are common atheist methods for

dismissing the existence of God. It is easy to see why the literal reading of Genesis
 3

would likely be criticized in contrast to the growing amount of scientific evidence

supporting evolution. Fundamentalists argue that Science is not without its

criticisms and question the accuracy of carbon dating and other scientific tools.

These Christians are always quick to remind people that evolution is still only a

theory and nothing more. This argument seems to be losing ground in light of new

scientific research. For fundamentalists, the determination of evolution as fact

would render Genesis and consequently Christianity as false.

Modernists or liberal Christians are not in agreement with fundamentalist

thought. They choose to interpret Genesis with a more metaphorical approach. This

is by no means a new idea, for even Saint Augustine encourages different

interpretations (Augustine, 259). Through a metaphorical interpretation of Genesis,

these Christians have come to accept Darwin’s thought and contemporary evolution

as possible without compromising their faith. This belief in both evolution and God

has been coined ‘theistic evolution’. According to believers of theistic evolution,

Darwinism and contemporary evolution would not disprove the existence of God as

they would for fundamentalists. By treating Genesis as such, these Christians dodge

the traditional argument of atheists against fundamentalists and simultaneously use

that argument to further glorify God. If evolution is true, then it is possible that “God

could…have activated evolution” (Van Biema, 3). Theistic evolution is not without its

criticisms, drawing fire from both fundamentalists and atheists a like. The argument

of both fundamentalists and atheists boils down to hypocrisy. If you can take the

Genesis account metaphorically, what prevents you from interpreting other parts of

the Bible in the same way? For theistic evolutionists, there is no error in interpreting

the Genesis metaphorically.

 4

One of the common fundamentalist arguments against the metaphorical

interpretation of Genesis is that it takes the glory away from God. The acceptance of

evolution renders what God created imperfect and that what the Bible says is false.

Theistic evolutionists believe that God is more than capable of creating the world

and every organism there is within six days. If God chose to create life through

evolution, then that does not render life any less perfect than what Genesis states.

Perhaps what made God’s creations so perfect was that they were capable of

changing to adapt to an ever-changing world. Perfection does not necessarily mean

unchanging. The instantaneous creation of all things is indeed miraculous but God’s

power is equally shown in the complex and lengthy process of evolution. Believing

in evolution also does not imply that Genesis is false. Jesus himself used parables in

which the events of those parables may not have ever occurred. Parables do not

require the story to be true, what is important is the meaning of the parable.

Interpreting Genesis metaphorically does not render the Bible false; it highlights the

message that God is the all-powerful creator just the same as if you interpret it

literally.

Atheists also believe theistic evolution to be hypocrisy, an idea of picking and

choosing. Atheists argue that if Christians can take Genesis metaphorically, then

would not the original sin of Adam and Eve be metaphorical as well? If the Fall of

Man is indeed metaphorical, then did Jesus come to save us from a metaphorical

sin? If that is true, then why would humans need Jesus for a metaphorical act of sin?

Again, the atheist tool of ‘why?’ comes into play. Theistic evolutionists do not

pretend to fully understand the mysteries of the universe any more than scientific

atheists do. Similarly to how Darwin demonstrates that variations exist while also
 5

admitting his ignorance of how they exist (201), Christians can demonstrate evil in

the world, yet how that evil exists is debatable.

Theistic evolutionists like to point at a false interpretation many atheists

have of Darwinism. Darwin boldly claims “that all animals and plants have

descended from…one prototype” (394). Darwin’s goal was to show the origin of

species and through that statement he extends this origin to a prototype in which

all species evolved from. This is too often interpreted as a proof or even a

hypothesis on the origin of life. Darwin may be trying to prove “that probably all the

organic beings…have descended from some one primordial form” (394), but never

does he attempt to explain how “life was first breathed” (394) into that form.

Darwin himself writes that “[natural selection] accords…with what we know of the

laws impressed on matter by the Creator” (397), not leaving out the possibility that

God could exist. Theistic evolution answers the many ‘whys’ of atheism with the

question: how can something come from nothing? No matter what the claim—that

all species originated from a single form or that all life is the result of an exploding

star—God is never disproved. God is easily identifiable for theistic evolutionists as

the creator of that primordial form, as the creator of that star, as the creator of all

matter in the universe.

For theistic evolutionists, the proof of God can be found in nature and His

majesty proclaimed in understanding the world He created. Through theistic

evolution, God’s power is equally glorified without the conflict between Christianity

and science. Theistic evolutionists are not the undecided opportunists of the

vestibule in Dante’s Inferno; they do not pick and choose between the many

spiritual messages of the Bible but rather worship God with an open-mind. The

concept of evolution does not have to be a black and white issue; it does not have
 6

to be all or nothing. Christians are capable of accepting evolution without

compromising their faith. Darwin’s On the Origin of Species may be considered “one

of the…most significant scientific works of all time” (1) but it in no way disproves

the existence of God to all believers. Darwin rather expands the possibility that at

the root of all complex processes of the world and our universe we can find God.