Finding Darwin’s God

I just finished Kenneth Miller’s “Finding Darwin’s God – A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution.“  It is well worth the read for anyone who is into the “evolution vs. creationism” debate which has gone on in the United States.  It is also worth the read for anyone who would like to read the honest reflections of a committed Christian who is also a respected scientist.

The opening two chapters introduce the authors personal story, which reveals his passion for both natural science and God.  It also lays out the tensions that the author has encountered because of these two passions.  He presents how his commitments to the scientific method and evolution along with his interactions with religious organizations and “anti-evolutionists”.  A poetic statement which captures his hope for the work closes the chapter and is as follows:

We are indeed Eden’s children, yet it is time to place Genesis alongside the geocentric myth in the basket of stories that once, in a world of intellectual naivete, made helpful sense.  As we walk through the gates, aware of the dazzling richness of the genuine biological world,there might even be a smile on the Creator’s face–that at long last His creatures have learned enough to understand His world as it truly is.

In the next three chapters, he addresses the “anti-evolutionists” who he engaged either through public debate or personal interaction.  Young earth creationists and intelligent design theorists which he separates into two different types represented by Philip Johnson (Darwin on Trial) and Michael Behe.  Miller explains that the young earth creationists of ICR represent a complete rejection of the discipline of biology in order to sustain thier view on a young earth creationism.  The intelligent design of Johnson, who he describes as a lawyer, is a rhetorical rejection of evolutionary theory but with no scientific justification.  And the intelligent design of Michael Behe (Darwin’s Black Box) is a scientific challenge to evolutionary theory in its current form but with poor scientific support.  In short, he characterizes the reaction to evolution by creationists as emotional and not out of a concern for the scientific validity of evolution.  Here Johnson repeats his stance that evolution as scientific theoryon the origin and development of species has not been successfully disproven.

He then describes why this is such an emotional and visceral issue for some creationists by describing how scientists have engaged religion with evolutionary theory.  He describes the view’s of people like Richard Dawkins, Steven Jay Gould and Daniel Dennett.  He shows that they have extended evolutionary theory beyond science with their belief in deterministic materials.

He goes on to show that neither the position of the creationist or materialist allows for an honest engagement of both evolution and religious faith.  With 20th century research in physics, he shows that the “determinism” of Newtonian science has fallen apart which allows him to understand how both the work of God and evolution can be held together.  He goes on to explain various aspects of God’s action in the world.  In this part, he addresses the “ruthless” nature of natural selection.  He points to the fact that the same natural selection, which describes how one animal became extinct through “weak” traits, also describes the development of altruism in animals in order to perpetuate life.  This reveals that “ruthless” is merely a matter of perspective and it may not be appropriately applied to evolution.

Finally, I find that “Finding Darwin’s God” is both a balanced and quality representation of the “evolution vs. creation” debate that has occurred in the United States.  I also find it sad that this debate continues to rage on because of the dogmatic position on both sides of the debate.  I hope that you will pick up this work if have questions concerning the issues that surround this debate.

__________
Here are some questions that Miller’s work brought to my mind regarding discipleship:

Do we care more about “beliefs” then truth?

Do we honestly engage ideas like evolution and creationism with Miller’s commitment to reject either if the evidence demands it?

Do you believe that evolution is a valid theory concerning the origin of species?

Would God be less powerful if we believed that He created the process of evolution and sustains it today?

What aspect of evolution is inconsistent with the story of God?