MondayMorningInsight.com > Why I Thank God for Charles Darwin

HOME | CHURCH JOB OPENINGS | ABOUT MMI | CATEGORIES OF INTEREST | CONTACT US

Why I Thank God for Charles Darwin

Orginally published on Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 7:06 AM
by Todd Rhoades

Rev. Michael Dowd writes, "July 1st marks the 150th anniversary of the theory of evolution. For years, I believed that Darwin was of the devil. Now, I deeply honor his contribution to religion and my walk with God. Indeed, other than Jesus, no one has had a more positive impact on my faith and my ministry than has Charles Darwin.

For the last six years as an itinerant evolutionary evangelist, I have preached the good news of evolution from the pulpits of hundreds of churches across America. Faith can be strengthened and difficulties in life surmounted--all by bringing a mainstream scientific understanding of evolution into our religious lives. The response has been phenomenal. People of all ages and across the theological spectrum light up when they see new possibilities open for them, their loved ones, and the world. Often tearfully, always excitedly, they share their testimonials. Here is mine..."

Jesus and a nurturing church community gave me a lifeline in my struggles to find sobriety as a young man. A corollary of being born again, however, was that the preachers I listened to and the authors I read told me that accepting evolution would seduce me away from godly living. At first I believed them. But then I met professors, ministers, priests, nuns, rabbis, and chaplains who not only accepted an evolutionary view of cosmos and culture but found it religiously inspiring. Soon I too came to embrace the history of everyone and everything as our common Creation story.

Today, thanks to Charles Darwin and the countless evolutionary scientists and writers he inspired--in fields as diverse as astrophysics, geology, genetics, primatology, sociobiology, and brain science--I interpret my Christian faith in far broader and more this-world realistic ways than ever before. It is obvious to me now that God didn’t stop revealing truth vital to human wellbeing back when people believed the world was flat and religious insights were recorded on animal skins. God is still communicating faithfully today, publicly, through the worldwide, self-correcting scientific enterprise. I now see science as revelatory and facts as God’s native tongue.

You can read the whole article here...

What do you think?

This post has been viewed 581 times so far.

There are 20 Comments:

Posted by Peter Hamm

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 8:21 AM

Boy, Todd, you love to stir things up lately.

Here’s my take. If you mean evolution as change from one species to another by natural selection with no intervention by or need of a “god"-figure, then it is obvious to me that it is contrary to the Christian faith.

If you tell me that a person must accept a 6-24hour-day creation theology in order to be a Christian, then I am going to balk at that, too.

I am decidedly undecided on this issue, except that I am sure it is not a crucial one… not even in the top 10.

I’m not a scientist, I don’t understand it all. I do know that God did it all, and it is fearful and wonderful!
Posted by Joey Smith

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 8:47 AM

One comment from further down in the article (if I am reading correctly) may shed a little light on the overall tone of the article and the writers general perspective:

“No longer do I fear that my family and friends will suffer for eternity in the fires of an otherworldly hell. No longer am I led astray by my instincts--my unchosen nature”

The brutality God exhibits towards sin seen in His treatment of Israel and His Son at the Cross and the exclusive and intolerant statements of Jesus are very hard for our time or any time.
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 9:17 AM

There were two quotes later in the article that confused me:

“When I see suffering nearly everywhere today, I am overwhelmed with compassion and called to action.”

And…

“An evolutionary understanding urges me to grow in morality and to expand my circles of care and compassion--even to include those who see the world in very different ways. My worship of God now includes doing everything I can to ensure a just and thriving future for planet Earth, for our children’s children, and for as many species as possible.”

If the writer of the article truly believed and adhered to the complete theory of macroevolution, these feelings should be a hindrance and a throwback. In evolution, the strongest survive, and the weaker species die off. In this line of thinking, when we see suffering, we should be rejoicing that our competition is not doing as well as we are, and we should be doing what we can to eliminate them from possibly infringing upon our ability to grow and flourish. Compassion would be something to retard our ability to be number one in the universe.

I’m sorry, I don’t buy it.

--
CS
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 9:29 AM

Societies that practice compassion are stronger than societies that don’t.

When each member of a society is out to get another, how can the whole be stronger than the parts? A house divided against itself cannot stand.

For example, this is one reason why we spend more on health care per person, and get less for it, than practically any developed country in the world. This severely weakens our finances.

Societies that have compassionate health care systems spend less than societies where the quality of health care is determined by income.
Posted by John

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 10:32 AM

The scary part of all of this is, if you search “michael dowd” on Youtube, you see him preaching his “gospel” in churches.
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 10:46 AM

Peter,

I’m pretty sure God being who he says he is (Creator) and did what He said He did (in six days) and the way he created (each after it’s own kind) is in the Top 10. Of course six days to God is could be quite different than what six days are to me, that’s open for discussion.

Anyway, this is the springboard from which much of the church has begun it’s swan dive into apostasy. God’s Word is just man’s interpretation of God, therefore our “faith” is our own interpretation of God. This is saturating the Church.

So, yeah, it’s in the Top 10.
Posted by Peter Hamm

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 11:06 AM

Jud,

I guess we’ll have to disagree, as I find no indication in the text that the Creation story is meant to be a science text. Is it a lesson that God in his sovereignty created everything that is? Absolutely. Does someone need to believe that it’s literally a six-day account to be saved? Absolutely not.
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Peter,

I NEVER said someone has to believe in a literal six-day creation to be saved. I DID say I believe that generally people who discount the creation account in Genesis interpret the Bible as Man’s take on God and therefore see their faith as their personal take on God.

How many times have you in a meeting of professing Christians heard sentences that go like this…

“MY God....

or

“What this verse means to ME is....

God is the arbiter of our Faith BY HIS HOLY WORD, not, us slicing and dicing the Bible to fit into our culturally conditioned sensebilities.
Posted by Daniel

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 1:52 PM

I too am grateful for Darwin’s work. The fact that so few evangelicals have come to terms with the overwhelming explanatory power of the evolutionary hypothesis is damning, and a danger to the cause of the gospel, in my opinion.

Creationism requires that we check our brains at the door and is consequently dishonoring to God, the brilliant Creator of our minds. We have brains, we should use them.

It should be sobering to all of you non-evolutionists out there that the only folks who ‘object’ to evolutionary timeframes and common descent have religious motivations for doing so. Everyone else is apparently able to follow the evidence where it leads…

And to conclude with an appeal to authority, you should note that ‘ID’ proponent Michael Behe finds the evidence for common descent (so-called ‘macroevolution’) and evolutionary timeframes to be entirely convincing. Stop and think about that for a little bit…

Peace,
-Daniel-
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 2:08 PM

Daniel,

Where are the bones?
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Daniel:

“Creationism requires that we check our brains at the door and is consequently dishonoring to God, the brilliant Creator of our minds. We have brains, we should use them.”

Creationism requires our brains to explore the world, nature, the universe, and ask in astonishment, “Wow, how did God do all of this?” I agree that we should use our brains, and argue that the stigma of creationism being an absent-minded explanation of everything is erroneous.

Creationism is like being given a puzzle that is already solved, and taking it apart to understand how it was assembled. We know God created everything, that He made man in His image, and we’re then trying to find out how it all works together, like Newton did.

--
CS
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 7:32 PM

I have to ask, “is this guy for real?”. I think that this guy has a wrong view of General Revelation, and of Special Revelation.

The Christian view is that science is from the mind of fallen depraved man, and sometimes we get it right.

The scripture is the “Word of God” from a perfect and divine being, what am I going to believe, man or God..... God obviously. If God is the God of the supernatural, what is so strange with believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis, with 6 creative days?

There are credible scientists who are 6 day creationists. Check out Answers in Genesis, and The Creation Research Society.

Darwin introduced humanistic ideas to explain the origin of man “apart from God”. Just as Freud introduced ideas on the behavior of man “apart from God”. (and that’s a whole different debate).

SSS
Posted by

Wednesday, July 02, 2008 at 9:07 PM

God created evolution. There is no conflict at all.

The idea that the world was created in six days or is only a few thousand years old is a good argument for using our reason to prayerfully interpret scripture.

Genesis is a beautiful blessed story that captures man’s understanding of how God works, and gives us a sense of mystery and awe, but it’s not a textbook. To make it science is to demean it. To use it to move ourselves closer to God is to deepen our faith.
Posted by

Thursday, July 03, 2008 at 7:14 AM

The problem with the “Theory of Evolution” (note the word “theory"is that not only do you have to check your brain at the door, you also have to check your hermeneutics and theology at the door.

Checking brain: the theory of evolution is not scientific! Time + chance (luck) is not science - it also violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (Law of Entropy) which says that everything goes from order to disorder, plus a myriad of other problems. IMHO it takes more faith to believe that there is no Designer behind the design (which is incredibly impressive) than to believe God did what He said He did.

Checking Hermenutics & Theology: in Hebrew the word “day” (yom) can mean and indefinite period of time, e.g. “the day of the Lord.” However, when an ordinal is used with the word day, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc., it always refers to a 24 hour period. In fact, the parameters to understanding this are given in Genesis - “evening and morning” which references a day as we know it. Also God used His rest on the 7th day to be a pattern. If it isn’t a day (literally) of rest, it means nothing. Theologically, the Bible records that death came through Adam. If the theory of evolution is accepted, then death was happening long before Adam existed and it is necessary to attempt to make this mean something different than what is said (lots of other theological issues come into play). Origins and Creation are not just some side note issue—it has implications for just about every area of theology, including redemption.

If one gets started wrong in Genesis, that individual will be off track through the rest of the Book all the way to Revelation. God’s blessings to you all as you seek to know Him in truth!
Posted by John

Thursday, July 03, 2008 at 9:21 AM

Here’s what this boils down to: If evolution is true, then not only is the Genesis account wrong (the argument that the term “day” can mean anything but a 24-hour period is not very convincing when looking at the Hebrew), but also that Jesus was wrong. In Mark 10:6-7 Jesus implies that he believed that Man existed at the ‘beginning’ of the world.

Long story short, this creates some major problems for Christian Theology.

If you’d like to see an expanded version of my thoughts on this, please see http://louderthanjesusfish.blogspot.com/2008/07/thank-god-for-charles-darwin.html

(I’m only posting this because it is specifically relevant to this article)
Posted by Peter Hamm

Thursday, July 03, 2008 at 9:43 AM

John, and others.

Not everyone agrees that “anything but a 24-hour period is not very convincing when looking at the Hebrew”. Can you see that? Many commentators believe that the Genesis account was not meant to be taken as a literal scientific document, much as there wasn’t really a woman who lost a coin, there wasn’t really a man who owned a vineyard in Isaiah 7 or Jesus’ parable.

If it didn’t happen exactly as Genesis accords it “literally” some don’t feel that makes Genesis any less true, inspired, authoritative, etc…

[Long story short, this creates some major problems for Christian Theology.] Nope. I don’t think it creates any problems of any kind. Obviously, God can do anything, so making the earth in 6 24-hour days is certainly possible, but to argue that anyone who doesn’t buy that is selling out their theology from underneath themselves (as some would attest) is going too far, imho.
Posted by John

Thursday, July 03, 2008 at 10:26 AM

Peter,

I understand that this is not a theological forum, and that a debate here would not be appropriate, given the purpose of this blog.

In light of that, I would simply like to expand upon my previous points to help you (and perhaps others) understand my logic, specifically on how this creates problems for Christian Theology:

1. A non-literal interpretation of the creation account opens the door for non-literal interpretations for any portion of scripture. At no point does the author of Genesis indicate that he is giving anything other than what he believes is historical fact. The rest of the book is presented as a historical account as well, so why would only the opening chapters be figurative?

In contrast, when the Bible discusses prophesies, and specifically parables, there is typically a clear indication by way of introduction that these are illustrations, and therefore not to be taken literally. (for example, see Luke 15:3 regarding the Lost Coin)

If we can say that Genesis 1-3 isn’t to be taken literally, what stops us from interpreting, say, the life of Christ figuratively?

Of course, you know that I understand that there are more than just literal, historical texts in the Bible, however, there is little indication that this is not one of them.

2. I see that this whole issue causes problems for Christian Theology in that Jesus must be either a liar, mistaken, or the Bible is wrong about what Jesus said in Mark 10 (see my above comment). Why would the Son of God, one who was present at creation (however long it took), go along with a mistaken view of the Earth’s origins?

Furthermore, Paul (and many, if not all, of the New Testament writers) bases his theology on sin entering the human race from the very beginning. All Men have sinned, according to Paul. “Therefore just as sin entered the world through one man...” (Romans 5:12) If Darwinian Evolution be true, then when was the first Man, and did he sin?

Can you see what I mean about the problems that this causes to Christian Theology?

Either Evolution is true, or the Bible is. I cannot see them co-existing. But I understand that this is where our opinions differ, and I’ll respect that.

Please note that I have not written this to provoke a response, this is merely an expansion of my previous thoughts.

With Charity and Respect,

John
Posted by

Thursday, July 03, 2008 at 3:19 PM

Pretty good debate. I enjoyed watching the movie Expelled which in my opinion does a great job debunking the evolution theory. If you have not watched do so, it is well done. Done by Bestien who is of a Jewish background.
My take on this if anyone reads this is I am not thankful for Charles D. Infact I feel sorry for him and others who believe in evolution defined by him. To me you can’t marry Christianity and evolution they just don’t go together. Many Christians today try to do that because of what Science tells them. Me I believe the world was created in six 24 hour days. If someone does not believe that are they not Christians? No I dont’ think so and it does not worry me. What worries me is someone telling my child we evolved rather than were created, that she was accident rather than on purpose. What worries me also is Christians saying we can believe in Darwin’s theory and be Christian too. I don’t buy that. Infact to me that is selling out.
Posted by Daniel

Friday, July 04, 2008 at 8:33 PM

Believing truth isn’t selling out.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads…
Posted by

Monday, July 07, 2008 at 1:19 PM

How I love a vigorous debate between people who have studied their subject matter and are able to share real reasons why their view is truth.

What I see here is lots of folks drawing truth from scripture and lots of evidentiary and experiential citations regarding the nature of God. Along side them, many of you are citing what you’ve been told or read others say, and sadly have been led down a path to nowhere.

God is not glorified by macro-evolutionary teaching in the Church. The god of evolution as shared here, friends, is subject to man and an all powerful Nature who really makes the plans and decisions. In case you don’t recognize it, Daniel and clan, this is the very lie of Satan in the Garden in that ‘beautiful story’ in Genesis. Even if you only recognize the Bible as a set of morality tales, that one would be pretty hard to miss in this instance, now wouldn’t it?

I say these things with the love of Christ in my heart for you folks, not bitterness. I pray that the road to wisdom for you is not too hard.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Post Your Comments:

I'm a chronic workaholic, love to connect leaders with other leaders, and would consider myself somewhat of a 'maven'. Hopefully you'll find something here at MMI you'll like and will return often. If you want, you can find out more about me or follow my every step.