An Evangelical Palaeontology student reviews Lamoureux’s Evolutionary Creation

This is a guest review of Denis Lamoureux’s new book "Evolutionary Creation" by Jordan Mallon. Jordan is a member of the CSCA and has just been accepted into a PhD program in the Dept. of Biological Sciences at the University of Calgary. Congratulations Jordan!

Like Denis Lamoureux, the author of Evolutionary Creation, I'm an Evangelical Christian and a student of palaeontology and evolution. At one time, such an admission would have incited whispers and invited accusations of cognitive dissonance. Many see the act of trying to marry evolutionary science with Christian theology as futile, like trying fit a square peg in a round hole. And for many years I felt the same way. I felt as though there was some piece of the puzzle missing that would help me to make sense of the book God inspired and the world He created.

The Missing Piece of the Puzzle
Lamoureux's latest contribution is that missing puzzle piece. Having been born and raised in a conservative Lutheran church, I was taught to believe in young earth creationism and was told that evolution is a tool of the devil. Probably the most common objection to evolution was that it contradicted the sin-death connection presented in the Bible. After all, if there was death before Adam, how could Adam's sin have introduced death into the world, as Paul repeats in the New Testament? In his book, Lamoureux attempts to answer the "sin-death problem". His solution is simple: There is no sin-death problem.

Approaches to the Relationship of Scripture and Science
We reach this conclusion by first recognizing two important categories in the evolution/creation dialogue: concordism and accommodationism. Concordism is the belief that the Bible's statements about science and history are always accurate, and that any scientific theory that contradicts the Bible must be wrong. Accommodationism is the understanding that God accommodated His message of faith, love, and redemption to the first Hebrew people using language and motifs they were familiar with (e.g. solid firmament in the sky, preformatism, numerology, etc.), and that any attempt to milk scientific insight from the Bible is missing the forest for the trees. Citing the example of Jesus' incarnation, Lamoureux sees the latter position as most in-line with God's nature. He defends this view using an inductive Bible study method, pointing to one example after another of the primitive science and history found in the Scriptures. Lamoureux is careful to defend biblical inerrancy, however, stating

"... the Bible is the inerrant and infallible eternal Word of God transcending time and incarnated in the incidental imperfect words of humans within history"
(p. 174).

Once we accept that the Bible does not necessarily contain accurate science, we are free to accept the conclusions of evolutionary science, regardless of whether or not they accord with the Genesis creation account. Using the analogy of human development in the womb (Psalm 139:13-14), Lamoureux presents evolution as just another natural process, ordained and sustained by God, by which the Lord achieves His good will and creates human life. In fact, Lamoureux sees evolution as the perfect creative process by which God both reveals Himself to us in the design reflected in that process (Deus Revelatus), and by which He hides Himself from us in the non-miraculous nature of that process (Deus Absconditus), thereby allowing us as His children the opportunity to truly exemplify our faith in Him. This was a key point that really struck a chord with me. After all, we wouldn't need faith if we could use science to prove God's handiwork in the world.

Suffering and Death
But how can Jesus, the Prince of Peace, make use of evolution, which involves suffering and death, to achieve His good will? Lamoureux offers a robust theodicy in answer to this question, noting that Jesus himself declared that suffering and death exist to bring glory to God (e.g., John 11:4). Strangely, this contrasts with Paul's understanding of the origin of death through Adam, as revealed by Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15. Returning to the concept of accommodationism, Lamoureux completes this puzzle by noting that the origin of human suffering and death in Genesis 3 is itself an accommodation of God to the ancient motifs of the first Hebrew people. Death isn't a result of sin, as Genesis 3 states and Paul repeats. Death exists to bring glory to God, as Jesus himself tells us.

Some of these claims will no doubt leave many Christians uncomfortable. Lamoureux's suggestions are well removed from traditional church thinking (though perhaps not as far removed as some might think). I am still not sure how to feel about some aspects of the book, but that is part of the beauty of works like this one: It forces us to engage our Evangelical minds and to actually THINK about what we believe and why we believe it. Lamoureux admits to not having all the answers, but this is something he has learned to live with. What remains clear is the author's undying commitment to Christ and to understanding the world and the Word He has given us. And for that reason alone, I think Lamoureux deserves to be heard.

God's Universe: A Review

I have mentioned Owen Gingerich’s book "God’s Universe" in several comments & emails. Recently, while enjoying the more natural part of God’s Universe in northern Ontario, I had a chance to reread his book. I think I was more impressed with it the second time I read it. To me, that’s one indication of a good book.

Gingerich is a Harvard astronomer of Amish background, a somewhat surprising combination. Rather than being dissuaded from higher education, he was actually encouraged to follow his passion for astronomy since we should not “let the atheists take over any field”. He is also a historian of science, and this allows him some astute insight and understanding into the science / faith dialogue. This insight and understanding is almost entirely absent from many popular modern scientific books that depend on the “historical fiction” of Andrew White's "A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom". The historical anecdotes and the conclusions Gingerich draws from these anecdotes in "God’s Universe" not only demonstrate that the “inherent conflict thesis” is unsupportable, but also make for a compelling & accessible book.

God’s Universe is based on a series of lectures Gingerich provided at Harvard. The first lecture entitled “Is Mediocrity a Good Idea” examines the contention of the modern day “Copernican principle” (not to be confused with Copernican heliocentricism). This states that our galaxy, our solar system, our earth, and humanity are not special at all but simply one insignificant, infinitesimally small, irrelevant accident, possibly one of many such accidents. Using his background as both a scientist and a historian, Gingerich shows that the Copernican Principle is more ideology than science.

I find it fascinating to compare the ideology the Copernican Principle with the ideology of “Rare Earth” espoused by many Christians and others. This is the contention that the earth is not only very special, but absolutely unique in our mind-bogglingly expansive universe. I can’t say I’ve examined the math closely, but I highly doubt we have enough understanding to say either that the earth is unique, or that there are billions of other worlds like ours. I’m certainly not jumping on the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) bandwagon, but to state categorically that the search is theoretically (and not just practically) doomed is to go to far. I love Gingerich’s nugget near the end of his first lecture where he states that:

“We human beings are the most extraordinary creatures we know about, and part of our glory is that we can imagine we are not the most remarkable creatures in the entire universe”.

The second lecture entitled “Dare a Scientist Believe in Design” is daring indeed. For a scientist, “supporting design” is a declaration that often invites derision from one’s colleagues and career limiting repercussions. For a Christian, and particularly for Evangelical Christians, “opposing design” invites suspicion of a sell-out or even accusations of heresy. So one could forgive Gingerich and other Evangelical scientists for dancing around the design debate or even ignoring it altogether. Gingerich does neither.

Gingerich ends his first lecture with a quote that could be seen an introduction to the second, stating that:

For me the universe is more coherent and congenial place if I assume that it embodies purpose and intention.

So, if by intelligent design, one means there is purpose to the universe then Gingerich identifies with intelligent design. However, he clearly does not identify with the current Intelligent Design movement that ridicules the theory of evolution. For Gingerich, “evolution today is unfinished theory, but these are not grounds for dismissing it”. He uses Aristole’s catagories of final (primary) and efficient (secondary) causes to show how both materialistic scientists and ID proponents confuse the “How” and “Why” questions of divine action. In a quote sure to raise the ire of both those attempting to teach the religion of “atheistic evolution”, and those trying to eliminate the teaching of biological evolution he states:

“It is just as wrong to present evolution in high school classrooms as a final cause as it is to fob off ID as a substitute for an efficacious efficient cause”.

In the third chapter entitled “Questions without Answers”, Gingerich states that “Science is good at asking questions that are answerable” but that many questions cannot be addressed by science. These metaphysical questions are the ones with which religion must deal. Science may have some input to these answers, but is the junior partner. In Gingerich’s words, “physics constrains metaphysics, but does not determine it”. He also addresses the place of “proof” in science, which has particular application for complex areas like biological evolution:

Today science marches on not so much via proofs as through the persuasive coherency of the picture it presents. What passes for truth in science is a comprehensive pattern of interconnected answers posed to nature – explanations of how things work though not necessarily why they work.

In conclusion, I’d like to quote Ted Davis’s review of “God’s Universe”:

Ultimately, as [Gingerich] states, the God creative enough “to make the entire observable universe in a dense dot of pure energy is incomprehensible, beyond human imagining,” but still “we can see the consequences of this unimaginably powerful creative act: a universe congenial to the ultimate formation of life, life giving rise to intelligence that can ask questions science cannot answer. It is God’s universe.”

It does indeed take faith to draw this conclusion in the absence of scientific proof—in Gingerich’s case, a deeply Christian faith, heavily informed by a profoundly incarnational understanding of the creation. Jesus—not the universe—is for Gingerich the “supreme example” of divine revelation, and in his mortal suffering “the nature of God’s self-limited, dappled world became excruciatingly clear. God acts within the world,” he concludes, “but not always in the ways most obvious to our blinkered vision.”

Perspectives on an Evolving Creation: A Review of Keith Miller's collection of essays

For most evangelicals wanting a friendly introduction to evolution from an evangelical perspective, one of the books I reviewed yesterday is adequate. However, I suspect that many readers grappling with both the science and the faith implications of biological evolution will need much more. I highly recommend Perspectives on an Evolving Creation edited by Keith Miller. This is collection of more than 20 essays written by primarily evangelical specialists including cosmologists, biologists, biochemists, anthropologists, geologists, historians, theologians, philosophers, and psychologists.

The entire second section (chapters 6-13) on the scientific evidence and theory is particularly good. Chapter 6 surveys the evidence for an ancient universe; Chapter 7 for an ancient earth. Chapter 8 reviews the evidence in the fossil record for common descent. This is of particular interest to evangelicals who have been repeatedly told that there "are no transitional fossils". Chapter 9 deals with the fact that most body forms appear "instantaneously" in the fossil record during the Cambrian epoch around 500 million years ago. Some anti-evolutionists have interpreted this “Cambrian Explosion” as evidence for special creation rather than continuous, gradual creation.. Chapters 10 and 11 deal specifically with the evidence for human evolution, while chapter 12 surveys the evidence for evolution from biochemistry. Chapter 13 is a direct rebuttal of Intelligent Design proponents who claim that the random, chance mechanisms of Darwinian evolution could not have resulted in earths amazingly complex organisms.

I found three essays in the third section on "Theological Implications" particularly helpful. In Chapter 14 Howard Van Til considers the implications of a universe that is capable of "creating itself". He argues that this in no way implies atheism and refers to it as a "Generously Gifted Creation". In Chapter 16 George Murphy examines the implications of evolution in the light of the crucified incarnate God. Finally, in chapter 20, Robin Collins proposes how evolution can be reconciled with the doctrine of Original Sin. (Frankly, this is an issue with which I still struggle).

Chapter 5 may be the best of the book. In "Does Science Exclude God? Natural Law, Chance, Miracles and Scientific practice" Loren Haarsma tackles some of the toughest questions regarding the interaction between evolutionary evidence and faith. He demonstrates that "Chance" in evolution is not an alternative explanation for God, that science (and evolution) is not intrinsically atheistic, that science does not exclude miracles, and that scientific explanations do not imply the absence of divine action. And he does it while writing one of the most readable, accessible chapters in the book.

Minor disappointment with the book: There was no index at all. Even books targeted to the general reader (eg. Falk & Collins books reviewed yesterday) have at least short indexes. Not sure why this more academic volume does not. Also, I would definitely have liked to see a bibliography or at least a "recommended further reading list".

In summary: There are very, very few books published that cover the intellectual ground like "Perspectives on an Evolving Creation". When you have a very limited choice, its fortunate when one of those choices is so good. I heartily recommend it.

Evolution and Faith from an Evangelical Perspective: Recommended Introductory Books

1. The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by Francis Collins

Collins is probably the most prominent Evangelical scientist today. As the Director of National Human Genome Research Institute, he lead the team that mapped and sequenced all the human DNA, arguably the greatest scientific breakthrough of the century. Collins grew up as an atheist and only encountered God in his mid-twenties as a medical intern. CS Lewis’s Mere Christianity was very influential in his spiritual formation.

Evolution was not something he ever questioned either prior to or after his conversion. “The Language of God” is not a defense of evolution per se – Collins primary objective is to show how scientific findings support belief in God. However, biological evolution is an integral part of this worldview that supports his theism. As such he rejects the findings of both the YEC and ID movements.

This book can function as a very readable introduction to evolution for evangelical Christians, or as an introduction to the Christian faith to those that are comfortable with the science, but unfamiliar with Christianity.

2. Coming to Peace with Science by Darryl Falk

Darryl Falk grew up in an Evangelical home but was always fascinated by natural science. This book documents his struggle, even from an early age, with the seeming contradictions being taught in science class and those taught in church. His objective is to present, as gently as possible, the evidence for evolution to an evangelical audience that is predisposed to be hostile to evolution. In fact, he for the most part avoids the use of the word evolution, and instead substitutes the phrase “gradual creation”. This book is not nearly as popular as Collins book but I liked it better for the simple reason that it spoke so directly to my own experience.

One small quibble with this one: although Falk provides an excellent analysis of evolutionary evidence and theological implications, he virtually ignores the topic of human evolution until one short section in his conclusion. I understand why he does this given the sensitively of this topic for evangelicals (after all, the evolution of single celled creatures into multi-celled creatures does not raise the same types of questions as that of human evolution). Still, this can be frustrating for those that want to grapple with the central problem head on.

3. God and Evolution: A Faith-Based Understanding by David Wilcox

Wilcox is a biologist who has long maintained that creation and evolution are not mutually exclusive. This book outlines his ideas on the integration of his science and his Christian faith. Of particular note are the excellent sections on human evolution. Unlike Falk, Wilcox does not shy away from the subject. He is a specialist in hominid evolution and covers the topic well.

4. “Evolutionary Creation: An Evangelical Approach to Evolution”, by Denis Lamoureux

Ok. I haven’t read this yet .... its still not published. Denis is a Canadian biologist at University of Albert who teach Science and Religion courses. You can view an outline of his forthcoming book at: http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/3EvoCrBk.htm. He also has some excellent online material on his web page, in particular, his essay “Evolutionary Creation” at http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/3EvoCr.htm .