What are the religious responses to evolution?

Answer 1

Religious responses to the science of evolution are varied. The Dalai Lama has said that just as Buddhism searches for the truth, so does science, and if Buddhism needs to adapt to new scientific theories then it will. At the other extreme, biblical literalists continue to teach that the world is too young for evolution to have occurred. Although the Christian Churches were almost unanimous in condemning Darwin's Theory, this has since changed and some of the modern Christian responses include:

• The Catholic Church has now reacted favourably. Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis; Pope John Paul II, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996), said that new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis; Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design" theories, instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science.
• The Episcopal Church has said that the theory of evolution does not conflict with Christian faith. In 2006, the General Convention affirmed, via Resolution A129, that God is creator and added that "the theory of evolution provides a fruitful and unifying scientific explanation for the emergence of life on earth, that many theological interpretations of origins can readily embrace an evolutionary outlook, and that an acceptance of evolution is entirely compatible with an authentic and living Christian faith." The Church encourages the teaching of evolution in schools.
• The Church of England is considering the possibility of apologising posthumously to Darwin, for its earlier condemnation of his theory

Answer:The religious response to evolution is that evolution is not science, in fact, it contradicts true science. Refer to the chart below.

Creation

Evolution

Cause

God was the Cause

For every effect, there is a cause (observable)

There was not cause - 15 billion years ago for no know reason, the universe exploded itself into existence. Time, chance, and natural process created all things.

The creation of the universe is an effect with no cause (not observable).

Origin

The universe was spoken into existence by God's Word.

Matter cannot be created or destroyed by natural processes (observable).

Began with 'singularity', a tiny infinitely hot and dense point

Matter was created by a natural process (not observable).

Energy

We are devolving

Energy goes from a state of usable energy to less usable energy (observable).

We are evolving

Energy goes from a state of less usable energy to more usable energy (not observable).

Space

Earth created first (day 1)

Stars came afterwards (day 4) with the sun and moon.

Stars formed first

Earth formed afterwards

Earths

Covering

Water

Fire

Time Constraints

6 Days - The creation of the World was FINISHED in six day and is no longer taking place (observable).

Infinite Time - 4.6 billion years ago the earth evolved by natural processes. The world is in a continuous process of creation evolution (not observable).

Quality

Very Good

Primitive, Violent

Planning of

Life

By design

Accident

Origin of

Life

God

Life comes from life (observable), no known exceptions.

Forces of Nature

It is possible for life to come from non-life (not observable).

Time needed

for Life

2 Days (Faith based) - all animal/human life was created on day 5 and 6.

Millions of years (Faith based) - They don't know how it happened but given enough time they BELIEVE it will.

Species

Kind begets kind (observable).

Kind begets some other kind (not observable).

Animal Life

Birds first, then

Reptiles

Reptiles first, then

Birds

Human Life

Man was created on day six

Man is made in the image of God.

3.5 billion years ago life evolved

Humans evolved from ape-like creatures.

Beginning

of Death

After Adam sinned, not a process of creation - it is a product of man's sin.

Always been present, part of the creation process - the means by which man evolves into a higher being.

Cause of

Death

Sin, there was no death before Adam sinned (plant life not included), the breath of life was breathed into animals but not plants.

Natural process, existed from the beginning of life

Spiritual

Death

Both physical and spiritual, you will give an account of your life after you die.

Physical only, no accountability after death.

Sediment Layers,

Canyons

Form rapidly (liquefaction). Witnessed during Mt. St. Helen (observable).

Form slowly. No evidence witnessed (not observable).

Fossil Creation

Catastrophic event, rapid burial in water, (observable).

Buried by dust over long periods of time (not observable).

Marine fossils on

Mountains

Global flood, Genesis account

Rapid 40 day/night event

Springs of the deep broken up

All creation perished

All mountains covered by at least 20 ft.

About 200 legends from cultures all over the world.

Local floods, earth sinking into the ocean and rising again.

No written record or legend

Trees through

layers

Fossilized trees spanning many layers indicates rapid burial by water, observable with Mt. St. Helen. Can be created in one week (observable).

Over many years plant life died, sank into the earth, and coal formed (not observable).

Coal, Oil,

Petrified

Wood

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood, can all be made in a matter of weeks, (observable).

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood take millions of years to form (not observable).

Biblical Day

Recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours and accept it as fact

Hebrew word "Yom", in all cases, means short period of time

defined to be evening and morning

days are distinguished between seasons and years (Genesis 1:14)

God's own word (Exodus 10:11)

writing style of Genesis is narrative, not poetic

genealogy of human race given

Some, recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours but reject the account as a myth.

Others, interpret the Biblical definition of day to mean millions of years.

Answer 2

Religious responses to the science of evolution are varied. The Dalai Lama has said that just as Buddhism searches for the truth, so does science, and if Buddhism needs to adapt to new scientific theories then it will. At the other extreme, biblical literalists continue to teach that the world is too young for evolution to have occurred. Although the Christian Churches were almost unanimous in condemning Darwin's Theory, this has since changed and some of the modern Christian responses include:

• The Catholic Church has now reacted favourably. Pope Pius XII stated in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950) that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith and that he considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis; Pope John Paul II, in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (1996), said that new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis; Pope Benedict has refused to endorse "intelligent design" theories, instead backing "theistic evolution" which considers that God created life through evolution with no clash between religion and science.

• The Episcopal Church has said that the theory of evolution does not conflict with Christian faith. In 2006, the General Convention affirmed, via Resolution A129, that God is creator and added that "the theory of evolution provides a fruitful and unifying scientific explanation for the emergence of life on earth, that many theological interpretations of origins can readily embrace an evolutionary outlook, and that an acceptance of evolution is entirely compatible with an authentic and living Christian faith." The Church encourages the teaching of evolution in schools.

• The Church of England is considering the possibility of apologising posthumously to Darwin, for its earlier condemnation of his theory.

Others have adopted a defensive position, seeking to justify what they consider a literal reading of The Bible. These positions are often categorised as creationism. For more information on these, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation

Answer 3

The following is one example:

Here are some arguments for Creationism, or against Evolution:

These point to Divine Creation:

• The staggering complexity of every organ and every cell in the human body.
  
• The vastness of our minds and emotions.
  
• The fact that the universe has definite design, order, and arrangement which cannot be sufficiently explained outside a theistic worldview. (This is how Abraham, without benefit of teachers, came to reject the chaotic world-view of idolatry and the possibility of atheism.)
  
• The laws of the universe seem to have been set in such a way that stars, planets and life can exist. Many constants of nature appear to be finely tuned for this, and the odds against this happening by chance are astronomical.
  

See: More detailed evidence of Creation

Also:

1) The glaring lack of transitional fossils has been noted by the evolutionists themselves, such as this statement from the famous paleontologist and evolutionist George G. Simpson; quote: "The regular lack of transitional fossils is not confined to primates alone, but is an almost universal phenomenon."
"The lack of transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real; they will never be filled" (Nilsson, N. Heribert).
"To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation" (Corner, E.J.H., Contemporary Botanical Thought).
2) Instances of falsifying of evidence by evolutionists, such as Haeckel's drawings, Archaeoraptor, the Cardiff "specimen," and Piltdown Man.
"Haeckel exaggerated the similarities [between embryos of different species] by idealizations and omissions, in a procedure that can only be called fraudulent. His drawings never fooled embryologists, who recognized his fudgings right from the start. The drawings, despite their noted inaccuracies, entered into the standard student textbooks of biology. Once ensconced in textbooks, misinformation becomes cocooned and effectively permanent, because textbooks copy from previous texts. We do, I think, have the right to be both astonished and ashamed by the century of mindless recycling that has led to the persistence of these drawings in a large number, if not a majority, of modern textbooks (Stephen Gould).
Dr. Jonathan Wells published a book in 2002 entitled Icons of Evolution. Dr. Wells states that the book shows that "the best-known 'evidences' for Darwin's theory have been exaggerated, distorted or even faked."

3) Creationists see the "survival of the fittest" and the dating of rock layers by fossils as being perfect tautologies.

4) The fact that some qualified, educated, normal scientists do not believe in evolution. Or at least question it, even if they still preach evolution: "Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species" (Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum).
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. It amazes me that this is swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest" (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner).

5) The fact that there is a shared, worldwide tradition among every ancient society that the world was created.

6) Evolving of new organs or species has not been witnessed during known history.

7) Mutations are harmful, not beneficial. One of the tasks of DNA and of long-term breeding is to avoid or repair any changes brought about by mutations. This means that our genetic apparatus is programmed to resist change.

8) Mutations, even if beneficial, do not create new organs.

9) The fact that a great number of fossils have been found in the "wrong" rock-layers according to what evolutionary Paleontology would require.

10) The fact that you need DNA to make DNA. No genetic code can be demonstrated to have arisen by chance, together with the ability to read that code and carry out its instructions. Information does not arise spontaneously; and there is an incredible amount of information in even the tiniest cell.
"A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations" (Michael Denton, author).
"The astounding structural complexity of a cell" (U.S. National Library of Medicine).
Concerning a single structure within a cell: "Without the motor protein, the microtubules don't slide and the cilium simply stands rigid. Without nexin, the tubules will slide against each other until they completely move past each other and the cilium disintegrates. Without the tubulin, there are no microtubules and no motion. The cilium is irreducibly complex. Like a mousetrap, it has all the properties of design and none of the properties of natural selection" (Michael Behe, prof. of biophysics).

11) The problem of the impossibility of abiogenesis in general. "The concept of abiogenesis is not science. It's fantasy" (J.L. Wile, Ph.D.).

12) The fact that evolution was once used as support for the belief that Blacks (or others) are less than highly-evolved humans. "Darwin was also convinced that the Europeans were evolutionarily more advanced than the black races" (Steven Rose, author). He also "reasoned that males are more evolutionarily advanced than females" (B. Kevics, author).

13. The first and second laws of thermodynamics point clearly to a Creator, since things undergo entropy rather than get more orderly over time.

14. "Radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be. Age-estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often very different. There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological clock. The uncertainties inherent in radiometric dating are disturbing to geologists and evolutionists." William D. Stansfield, Ph.D., Instructor of Biology, California Polytechnic State University.

15. "Even total rock systems may be open during metamorphism and may have their isotopic systems changed, making it impossible to determine their geologic age." Prof. Gunter Faure (Department of Geology, The Ohio State University, Columbus.)

16 a). At current rates of erosion the amount of sea-floor sediments actually found do not support a "billions of years" age for the Earth.
b) The amount of Sodium Chloride in the sea, also, is a small fraction of what the "old Earth" theory would postulate.
c) The Earth's magnetic field is decaying too fast to extrapolate a long age for the Earth.
d) The rate of accumulation of Moon-dust has been measured; and the amount of dust on the Moon was found to be vastly less than what scientists had predicted before the Moon-landings.
e) Helium is generated by radioactive elements as they decay. The escape of this helium into the atmosphere can be measured. According to the Evolutionary age of the Earth there should be much more helium in the atmosphere, instead of the 0.05% that is actually there.Also see:

God's wisdom seen in His creations

More about God's wisdom

Dissent against Darwin

The facts

Discovering Creation

Understanding Creation

Answer 4

Religious responses to evolution vary among different faith traditions. Some religious groups fully accept evolution as compatible with their beliefs, while others reject it due to conflicting interpretations of scripture. Some religious scholars reconcile evolution with their faith by viewing it as a natural mechanism through which a higher power created life.