A Case for Theistic Evolution: A Zondervan Digital Short

By Howard J. Van Till

Derived from Three Views on Creation and Evolution, this digital short argues that Christians need not oppose evolution and that God in fact created the world through evolutionary processes. More specifically, Van Till proposes a position called fully gifted creation, which he defines as the understanding that God created the natural world with a built-in capacity to develop and evolve. With thorough attention paid to the philosophical, scientific, theological, and practical implications of the viewpoint, A Case for Theistic Evolution will be useful both to readers wanting a basic introduction to theistic evolution and to those wanting to more deeply consider their own convictions regarding it.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Zondervan
• Release date: Apr 10, 2012
• ISBN: 9780310496502

Howard J. Van Till

Howard J. Van Till is professor of physics at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Book preview

A Case for Theistic Evolution

Howard J. Van Till

THE FULLY GIFTED CREATION

Theistic Evolution*

Howard J. Van Till

1. OVERALL POSITION

Personal Position on the Creation-Evolution Controversy

The Beginning of an Answer. To be very candid, I think that the creation-evolution controversy among Christians is the outgrowth of a serious misunderstanding both of the historic Christian doctrine of creation and the scientific concept of evolutionary development. I would even be so bold as to add that the misunderstanding of the historic doctrine of creation may be as widespread within the Christian community as it is outside of it, and that the misunderstanding of the scientific concept of evolution may be as widespread within the scientific community as it is outside of it. If this assessment is correct, then the controversy constitutes a regrettable mistake that must be repaired if the Christian church wishes to be effective in its presentation of the Gospel to a scientifically knowledgeable world in the centuries to come.

Nonetheless, although flawed concepts both of creation and evolution may be the source of the problem, here we are, engaged in a controversy that continues to cause a division of the Christian community into several camps, each of which is tempted to see itself as superior—either spiritually or intellectually—to all other camps. The fundamental questions at issue concern the character of divine creative activity and the nature of the creation that is the outcome of God’s creative action.

What is the best vocabulary to employ in our speech about God’s creative work? Is God’s creative action best described in a vocabulary that places especial emphasis on episodes of miraculous intervention in which God is believed to have imposed new forms on the raw materials that he made in the beginning? Or is it better described in a vocabulary that emphasizes God’s giving of being to a creation that is richly gifted with the capabilities to organize and transform itself into new forms in the course of time? Is the creation in fact gifted with all of the capabilities necessary to make possible the continuous evolutionary development envisioned by the majority of natural scientists today? Or has the scientific community committed a massive interpretive blunder, and should Christians expect, therefore, that a reexamination of the observational evidence will convincingly discredit the scientific concept of evolution?

I need to spell out the working definitions of several important terms that I will use throughout this essay. I have often described the creation-evolution controversy as a shouting match that generates more heat than light—more hostility than learning. One of the reasons for this unhappy state of affairs is the frequent failure of participants to identify the fundamental questions or to provide clear definitions of key terms.

The Larger Context of the Question. It should be self-evident that the creation-evolution controversy within the Christian community cannot be isolated from the creation-evolution debate between one camp of Christians and another camp of persons claiming to represent the scientific community. To a large number of people, both within and outside of the Christian community, it apparently makes sense to engage in a debate in which a person must choose either creation or evolution. Of course, faithful Christians would be expected to choose creation, and anyone who chose evolution would be presumed to stand outside of the Christian community, at least outside of the authentic and faithful portion of it.

The either/or format of the creation-evolution debate is, I believe, one of the most effective factors that has made the discussion of creation and evolution so controversial within the Christian community. If a Christian has been taught that there are only two fundamental perspectives on how the universe got to be as it now is—creation and evolution—and if he or she is forced to choose between them, how then could a faithful Christian find any credibility in the concept of evolutionary development?

But there are many Christians, especially those of us who are trained in the natural sciences, who feel strongly called to offer a perspective very different from either of the two views ordinarily presented. For me, a Christian who was privileged to be born into a denominational community with a rich theological heritage, this sense of calling arises out of a deep desire to maintain both Christian faithfulness and intellectual integrity. I was taught that maintaining both is not only possible, but also what God desires from me. Here I will present a view in which the Christian doctrine of creation and the scientific concept of evolution are not at all in conflict so that a choice between them becomes unnecessary. In fact, the very idea of an either/or choice between creation and evolution will be seen as wholly inappropriate.

But if you are a person who has been trained to think of creation and evolution as being labels for concepts that stand in radical opposition to each other, the goal of reconciling the two probably looks profoundly impossible. By the end of this discussion, however, I hope that you will see that reaching this goal is not only possible, but immensely worthwhile. Achieving this goal, however, will require some very careful thought. Complex issues demand thoughtful analysis. One aspect of careful thought that will be essential to us is the establishing of a high respect for the precise meanings of important words that will be employed. So, be prepared for a number of carefully stated definitions.

It is no secret that my presentation of a perspective in which the concepts of divine creation and biotic evolution are not treated as adversaries often puts me in a rather unpopular position, especially among conservative Christians. Several years ago I wrote a book titled The Fourth Day¹ In that work I explored the relationship between two portraits of the world’s formational history—one based on biblically informed Christian beliefs, and the other based on empirically informed scientific theories. The scientific portrait was represented by descriptions of what we have learned about cosmic evolution—the formational history of those inanimate objects and structures of interest to astronomy and cosmology: galaxies and stars, expanding space, and elementary particles. On only a few pages did I make passing reference to the possibility of biotic evolution (the formational history of life-forms), noting that I saw no reason to rule it out on either scientific or theological grounds. But guess which pages are most often cited by anxious critics?

Persons who have a strong desire, for whatever reason, to see the discussion cast in the shape of an either/or debate (usually, persons who see their side as the clear winner) do not take kindly to having the debate format discredited. Some preachers of atheism, for example, presume that their no-God message is strengthened by appeal to the scientific evidence favoring biotic evolution and the common ancestry of all life-forms present in the world today. Similarly, some proponents of modern special creationism presume that the best way to demonstrate the truth of Scripture and the need for a Creator-God is to prove that evolution is impossible or that, even if it were remotely possible, it did not actually occur. Although their faith commitments are as different as one could imagine, the two parties of the debate agree in their claim that a simple either/or choice must be made.

Commentary on the Creation-Evolution Debate. Who are the two parties of the debate? When creation and evolution are presented as opponents in a debate, the two positions represented are most often special creationist theism and evolutionary naturalism. The terms theism and naturalism both function here as labels for worldviews, where by worldview I mean a comprehensive set of beliefs about the nature and significance of all reality—the physical universe, the spiritual realm, the world of creatures, the realm of God or of gods, and everything else thought to exist.

By theism I mean a worldview founded on a belief in the existence of God. By naturalism I mean a worldview founded on the belief that the natural world is all there is to reality, that is, there is no need to consider the existence of God or of gods and the physical universe is presumed to constitute all of reality.² Some readers may recall the opening line of Carl Sagan’s 1981 Cosmos TV series, still available both in book and video format. From the whole series it was clear that by cosmos Sagan meant the physical universe, the universe as known by the natural sciences. The naturalistic worldview of the series was clear from the first words of the script: The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be.³

But both theism and naturalism come in a diversity of specific forms. The theism most often presented in the creation-evolution debate is special creationist Christian theism. It is rightly called both Christian and creationist because it holds to the historic Christian doctrine of creation—the belief that the one God who is revealed in the Scriptures is the Creator who has given being to the whole universe and who continues to sustain that creation in being. However, among Christians who hold to this fundamental and historic doctrine of creation, there has always been an interesting diversity of pictures of the way in which God’s creative activity became manifest in the formational history of the creation.

This distinction between doctrine and picture is, I believe, important to establish and employ in the remainder of our discussion. The historic Christian doctrine of creation is theological in focus (thus not concerned with the details of what might have happened,

Reviews for A Case for Theistic Evolution

[SokemRokemRobot · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

Evolution and the Book of Genesis completely contradicts each other. For example... evolution says, a reptile evolved into a bird, while the Bible says, birds were CREATED on Day 5 of creation, and the reptile was created on Day 6. Another example... evolution says, a land animal evolved into a whale, BUT, the Bible says, the whale was created on Day 5 and all land creatures were created on Day 6. Change what the Bible actually says, you're only making yourself a heretic... not a believer. A Christian has no room for the evolution lie in his/her life.

[steve777_2 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Good arguments on all three sides.