My Views on Evolution – A Reply to My Critics

In a previous post I referenced a survey done by LifeWay Research on the topic of creation. In that post I stated the way I would have answered the questions based on my present studies and thinking. I should emphasize that this was meant to be a conversation starter and only an indicator of the direction I found myself heading. I have come to no firm conclusions with the exception of the age of the universe which I do believe in an old earth. Among my few respondents I had two which I think warrant a reply. First I want to say something about the nature of this blog.

The Purpose of this Blog

I write this blog as an employee of Baker Book House. I am not, however, an official spokesperson for the store. My thoughts are entirely my own and are reflective of my reading. As a retailer I’m often asked what I’m reading and what I recommend on various topics. This blog is intended to engage a wide variety of topics I find of interest. I sometimes feature books with which I have disagreements but I still think are of value in that they are addressing questions people are asking. For example, in the post mentioned above I referenced the newest book by Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam.  There is much in this book that I questioned and thought was wrong but I still think the book is worth engaging and it raises important questions. As any blog does I do mention other items of interest that I find on the web as I did with this LifeWay survey. Our staff reflects a wide spectrum (with due respect to Roger Olson’s objections to the idea of a “spectrum”) within the Christian community and I would never intend to speak for anyone other than myself.

Response to Russ

Russ writes:

“The first is that science has not “proven” the age of the universe or the Earth. You can “prove” these things if you accept certain foundational presuppositions, but there’s really no reason to accept those presuppositions. The second is that evolution is a theory in crisis, a theory with many holes covered up with “just so stories.”

“You say that Christians who don’t believe in evolution must be ignorant. I say you’re committing the same fallacy you accuse other Christians of (claiming scientists are ignorant).

“Don’t just read evolutionists on this score, read some real responses. You say you want to have people to engage with –well, you’re not going to get there by saying Christians who don’t agree are ignorant right off the bat, and must claim ignorance in order to join the conversation.

Russ asks that I not “just read evolutionists on this score.” Far from it. Everything (with the exception of two books) I’ve read prior to this has been from people opposed to evolution! I’ve read Philip Johnson, J. P. Moreland, Michael Behe, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer and others (some of these writers accept some aspects of evolution like common ancestry while rejecting other aspects like random mutation). I recall many years ago listening to a debate between Norman Geisler and an evolutionist (I don’t recall his name) and was persuaded that Geisler won the debate hands down.

I have been a Christian for 37 years. I am a graduate of Moody Bible Institute and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. I have attended Presbyterian, Baptist, CRC, Charismatic, Independent Bible, and Evangelical Free churches. I have been in Christian retail for eleven years and have talked with hundreds of customers. This evangelical conservative community is what I was referring to by “religious community” and I stand by my assessment that most of them are sorely ignorant of science. Clearly, I know there are exceptions to this. Russ says he’s part of that minority which is great. I never meant to imply that if you don’t consider or believe in evolution then you must be ignorant of science. That simply doesn’t follow. My intention was to say that far too many Christians, myself included, have rejected evolution without seriously engaging the science involved. Finally, Russ quotes me on his blog but leaves off the last line of the quote which said, “Unfortunately, the level of Biblical knowledge in the religious community is sometimes equally deplorable.” I would have expected a bigger objection to that.

Response to Ken Ham and an anonymous emailer:

Noted Creationist Ken Ham was sent a notice of my post by an AiG supporter. In reply Ham bemoaned the state of our parent company Baker Publishing and my own consideration of evolution. I will not speak for our publishing house but only for what concerns me in Ham’s reply. Ham quotes from the email he received which he says “sums up the situation.” The email stated:

“I found it interesting to see the steps to apostasy eroding this man’s (Louis) faith as well as the LifeWay Research chart he included. . . Although I hate to see this happening before my eyes, I am reminded of the original sin where Satan tempted Eve with the heretical and evolutionary ideas of becoming like God and not trusting the words of God completely.”

Ham concludes his post with this comment:

“We can clearly see the seeds of doubt leading to unbelief operating in this employee at a Christian book publisher as the influence of compromising with evolution and millions of years takes its toll.”

First, by way of clarification, I don’t work for the publishing division but the retail store and the two are very different entities. Second, as a store we carry and sell products by Ken Ham and will continue to do so. The email to Ham says I’m on my way to apostasy. I don’t see it that way but I suspect that won’t change his/her mind but only reinforce the impression that I’m deceived by Satan. It is the rhetoric of this email and Ham’s response which don’t foster conversation but alienates people with questions. Far better was the final line from Russ’s post where he said, “Let me encourage you, when you encounter someone like this blogger, to engage them with real arguments. Get educated, and get engaged.” Yes! I couldn’t agree more. Let’s get engaged. The attitude of the email sent to Ham has judged me before even asking me a single question about what was causing my doubts.

Yes, I am considering the case for evolution. Yes, I am finding it more persuasive than before. That’s why I said it was a conversation worth having. Don’t simply make me a poster boy for the latest dupe to be fooled by evolutionary science. Don’t push me aside as a deluded puppet of Satan. Let’s just talk.

(A coworker of mine has offered some thoughts of his own on his personal blog. I appreciate his thoughts and encouragement. May his tribe increase.)