It has to be here. As a Mormon biologist, I cannot ignore both the existence and perception of evolution.
First of all, I find it somewhat annoying that Biologists almost literally worship Darwin for his contribution of evolution. I also find it annoying that very few non scientists have taken the time or thought to realize that evolution is much bigger than human evolution and the long existing controversies associated with it.
At Cornell, in every biology class we talked about evolution at some point in addition to taking a 3 credit evolution class. In my high school in Utah we'd barely addressed the concept so I was surprised when I was told evolution is fact. As in, has been completely proven. In science, we hesitate long and hard before labeling any theory as 'fact' because we know that there is still more we don't know that could disprove that theory. Evolution has been labeled a fact, as have most of Charles Darwin's ideas from On the Origin of Species. Now, for those of you who were not inundated with biological knowledge, On the Origin of Species does not address human evolution specifically. It talks about the nature of populations, the variation between individuals for example as well as stable population size and available resources. The variation is the key--he hypothesized it would be heritable and the best suited variations to the environment would be the most likely to carry on. Natural Selection, Darwin said, was the driving force. Now, all his theories have been rigorously studied. Species have variation and change over time: fact. I've seen it myself in flies over a period of months. It happens.
Now, how to fit that into my previous framework that "God created man in His own image." I'd already come to accept that the Big Bang probably happened and I'd never had a problem with that being potentially the way God had created the universe. I don't know enough about astrophysics to argue it either way. But since we don't believe in The Bible being completely literal, I don't see a problem with acknowledging the popular scientific theory. Likewise why not have evolution be the hand of God guiding the formation of man. I mean, is it really less believable than that He gathered dirt in His hands and blew life into it? And then proceeded to take a rib from Adam to create woman? In the 1909 statement, which the church has paraphrased over the years and even reprinted in 2002, all it says is that man is created in the image of God. Truthfully, the origin of man from apes (which is actually incorrect--the correct wording would be that apes and man share a common primate ancestor) is less controversial to me than the concept of evolution itself. As we evolve (and people evolve over time, there has been a noticeable change in height for example) we would be changing the image of God, albeit only slightly. Eventually, man will be quite different from what we are today. I used to try and cop out with the concept that the 2nd Coming will happen long before those changes occur, but now I'm just accepting that whether or not that is the case, it's okay. I cannot deny the changes in humans over known history.
For those of you to whom these ideas make you uncomfortable: feel comfortable knowing that scientists have yet to identify the common ancestor of apes and man. If you want to believe God magically created us, there is no proof to deny that. But it might eventually happen and what then? Your choices are 1. don't believe science because you're afraid or 2. have a crisis of your faith because The Bible and religious cultures around the world have told you it could not be and it is. All I can say for sure is that I believe God created man and that evolution is a fact. Put it together however you want.
First of all, I find it somewhat annoying that Biologists almost literally worship Darwin for his contribution of evolution. I also find it annoying that very few non scientists have taken the time or thought to realize that evolution is much bigger than human evolution and the long existing controversies associated with it.
At Cornell, in every biology class we talked about evolution at some point in addition to taking a 3 credit evolution class. In my high school in Utah we'd barely addressed the concept so I was surprised when I was told evolution is fact. As in, has been completely proven. In science, we hesitate long and hard before labeling any theory as 'fact' because we know that there is still more we don't know that could disprove that theory. Evolution has been labeled a fact, as have most of Charles Darwin's ideas from On the Origin of Species. Now, for those of you who were not inundated with biological knowledge, On the Origin of Species does not address human evolution specifically. It talks about the nature of populations, the variation between individuals for example as well as stable population size and available resources. The variation is the key--he hypothesized it would be heritable and the best suited variations to the environment would be the most likely to carry on. Natural Selection, Darwin said, was the driving force. Now, all his theories have been rigorously studied. Species have variation and change over time: fact. I've seen it myself in flies over a period of months. It happens.
Now, how to fit that into my previous framework that "God created man in His own image." I'd already come to accept that the Big Bang probably happened and I'd never had a problem with that being potentially the way God had created the universe. I don't know enough about astrophysics to argue it either way. But since we don't believe in The Bible being completely literal, I don't see a problem with acknowledging the popular scientific theory. Likewise why not have evolution be the hand of God guiding the formation of man. I mean, is it really less believable than that He gathered dirt in His hands and blew life into it? And then proceeded to take a rib from Adam to create woman? In the 1909 statement, which the church has paraphrased over the years and even reprinted in 2002, all it says is that man is created in the image of God. Truthfully, the origin of man from apes (which is actually incorrect--the correct wording would be that apes and man share a common primate ancestor) is less controversial to me than the concept of evolution itself. As we evolve (and people evolve over time, there has been a noticeable change in height for example) we would be changing the image of God, albeit only slightly. Eventually, man will be quite different from what we are today. I used to try and cop out with the concept that the 2nd Coming will happen long before those changes occur, but now I'm just accepting that whether or not that is the case, it's okay. I cannot deny the changes in humans over known history.
For those of you to whom these ideas make you uncomfortable: feel comfortable knowing that scientists have yet to identify the common ancestor of apes and man. If you want to believe God magically created us, there is no proof to deny that. But it might eventually happen and what then? Your choices are 1. don't believe science because you're afraid or 2. have a crisis of your faith because The Bible and religious cultures around the world have told you it could not be and it is. All I can say for sure is that I believe God created man and that evolution is a fact. Put it together however you want.
No comments:
Post a Comment