Welcome to Gaia! ::

Since Darwin’s day, the idea of the theory of Evolution being accepted by some Creationists is frightening. Its misconceptions bring about questions like “If we evolved from apes, then why are apes still around?” and “If men evolved from apes, does that mean humans aren’t created in the image of God?” The first question is a misconstrued paraphrase of Darwin’s actual idea. The second is a bad interpretation. There are other misconceptions of evolution, ranging from the linear ape-to-man diagram to the idea that evolution is concerned with the origin of life. Many creationists also bring up absurd descriptions of animals that will likely never exist, and twist the theory with claims asking why humans don’t spontaneously grow third arms. Regardless, when speaking of Darwin’s actual theory of evolution, it is plain that it can coexist with Creationism.

Darwin states directly in his Origin of Species that nobody can assume that all the species of animal on earth today were the same throughout all of time (Darwin 50). Nowhere does he say that he knows the specific origin of life, nor does he contest the possibility of a divine creator. He merely asserts that regardless of divine intervention, all living things on earth are evolving in some way, shape or form. He even goes on to say that human beings take part in the evolution of other animals because of our selective breeding of house pets, livestock, etc (50). Therefore, any person saying that evolution does not exist should consider the numerous breeds of dogs and other animals that humans selectively bred to acquire the wanted traits through several generations.

Some Creationists also argue that God created everything as it is seen now, and the Bible clearly states so. The applicable verse is Genesis 1:25, “…[and] everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind”. Metaphorically, animals being created according to their own kind could refer to the different animals that God created, as well as referring to being able to survive in Eden before the fall. There is no mention that the animals remained the exact same throughout the entire history of the world.

Another point made by Creationists is that Darwin’s Theory of Evolution put forth a hypothesis on the origin of life that did not involve a divine entity, and this position was made famous by Evangelist Chuck Missler, in a video where he uses a jar of peanut butter to disprove ‘evolution’. What Creationists are referring to when they mention this misconception is the theory of abiogenesis, which is primarily associated with the Miller-Urey experiment, which is another subject altogether. Missler says that by subjecting a jar of peanut butter to light and heat, the peanut butter should generate new life from the beginning (1:30). This misconception can be clarified by reiterating Darwin’s position that “We cannot suppose that all the breeds were suddenly produced as perfect and useful as we now see them” (50). He does not deny the existence of a creator, which eliminates the argument that he would presume to know the origin of life.

Kirk Cameron asserts that evolution is impossible because one cannot witness an animal evolving into a completely different species (2:50), which is also untrue. A species of animal can, under certain conditions, separate into two distinctly different species that can no longer interbreed in nature. This process is called speciation, and it can occur under circumstances like geographic isolation, where a species is separated by a geographical barrier like a mountain or body of water, and over a long period of time the selective pressures cause one or both groups to evolve into a different species (Berkeley 2006). Once speciation occurs, it is impossible for the two new species to interbreed in nature.

A common question that is asked by Creationists is “why don’t humans grow new limbs?” The answer is simple; humans do not need extra limbs. Evolution works in small changes over long periods of time so it’s not likely that one would see any animal suddenly produce offspring with extra limbs or organs. Evolution also only works with genetic information that was already there (Loxton 88 ), so with the exception of mutations which would lead to extra limbs, there is no way for that phenomenon to occur.
Another argument that is put forth is the question “if humans evolve from apes, then that means that humans are not created in the image of God?” When looking at Genesis, it says that God made all the animals and humans (Genesis 1:24-26). Would this also mean that, regardless of the species or whether or not humans evolved from another species, that all animals are created the same way? If, of course, the argument refers to man being made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-27), the verse might not necessarily mean that God literally created humans to physically resemble Him. Metaphorically, saying man is made in God’s image could just mean that humans were blessed with the gift of self-awareness and free will. If so, it would not matter what human beings looked like in the time of Genesis, because they were not made in the physical image of God. Nathan Aviezer of Skeptic Magazine states;



Kirk Cameron also brings up the topic of transitional fossils, saying that there is no evidence in the fossil record of a transitional fossil for any organism (4:13), and even mentions Darwin’s quote about large gaps in the fossil record. The counter to Cameron’s argument made by Brian Sapient, a member of an organization called the Rational Response Squad, is that all living things are transitional fossils, because according to the theory of evolution, all creatures are evolving. Sapient also relies on the point earlier about all life evolving slowly “one step at a time” (Sapient 5:35-6:45). Cameron also brings up micro- and macroevolution during this part, stating that microevolution was observable but macroevolution was not. According to a journal article written by Oksana Hlodan, there is evidence of whale species evolving feet over a long period of time, and spending a brief period on land before evolving again to go back to the sea;



The most common argument one can hear is the inquiry about why apes and monkeys still exist if humans evolved from them. First, Darwin never proposed the linear model of ape to Neanderthal to man. Darwin simply noted that species have a common ancestor they evolved from, like Australeopithecus Afarensis. His pigeons are a perfect example of this; he showed that numerous domestic breeds of pigeon are descended from the wild rock-pigeon. Darwin supports this by stating that if one of the domestic breeds is bred with another, different domestic breed, he can see the defining characteristics of the rock-pigeon displayed in the offspring of the domestic breeds (43-47). While this is not an example of different species sharing a common ancestor, it is an example of the potential transition from one species to another with the common ancestor present.

Darwin’s theory of evolution has been seen as a test of faith for many Creationists since his Origin of Species was first published in 1859. However, it is an understandable conflict of interest because science and religion have clashed before in history. Consider Galileo’s proposition of a heliocentric universe, where the church took several centuries to acknowledge the fact that he was right in proposing that the earth revolved around the sun. This debate is similar, because scientific theory almost always appears to challenge the dogma that religion has set.

Aviezer, Nathan. "Jews for Darwin." Skeptic Magazine 13 (2007): pages 10-12.

Caldwell, Roy. "Evolution 101: Speciation." Evolution 101. 2006. University of California Museum of Paleontology. 15 May 2007 <http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VSpeciation.shtml>.

Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species. New York: The Modern Library, 1998. pages 40-55.

Evangelist Chuck Missler Disproves Evolution with Jar of Peanut Butter. Dir. Unknown. Perf. Chuck Missler. 2007. AlterNer. 15 May 2007 <http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/50013>.

Face Off: Cameron on Evolution. Dir. Unknown. Perf. Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort, Brian Sapient, Kelly. 2007. ABC News. 15 May 2007 <http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=3160774>.

Hlodan, Oksana. "Macroevolution: Evolution Above the Species Level." BioScience 57 (2007): pages 222-225. WilsonWeb. 15 May 2007.

Holy Bible with Apocrypha. Gen. 1:24-27. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994.

Loxton, Daniel. "Evolution: Part One of Two." Skeptic Magazine 13 (2007): pages 79-89.

There are some denominations that take a similar tone. You could cite Roman Catholicism's Encyclicals on the topic.

Here is Pope Pius XII's commentary in 1950:
HUMANI GENERIS

Here is Pope John Paul II's commentary in 1996:
MESSAGE TO THE PONTIFICAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES:ON EVOLUTION

Read them and form your on conclusion.

It's nothing to hang the essay on, but it's an interesting to add. I don't have any solid sources but I seem to remember a handful of Protestant groups issuing similar commentaries.

Try reading the ******** thread.

The Catholic Church is like a posterboy for Orthodoxy, and it accepts evolution.