Christianity and Evolution

Back in November, Brian asked why it is so difficult for many people to square their faith with evolution. Based on discussions I've had with friends of mine who fall into this category, there are two principle obstacles to people being able to square their faith with the acceptance of the correctness of evolution. The first is a question of biblical interpretation, and the second is a philosophical problem.

The problem of interpretation arises because many Christians* believe that every passage of the Bible must be interpreted literally. If the Bible says the world was created in six days, then by gum, it was. They make no allowance for the possibility of a legitimate figurative or allegorical interpretation of Scripture**. Because of this, any idea resting on something which contradicts a literal reading of the Scriptures- in this case, the evolution of species over 3.5 billion years- is not only wrong but heretical as well.

The philosophical problem, and it is a problem, is that many of these people will make the further argument that the acceptance of evolution equates to the acceptance of Naturalism, or Materialism, the belief that all the physical world is all that exists. Needless to say, this is patently absurd. Naturalism can only follow from evolution if the only option is between Biblical literalism and Naturalism because evolution only contradicts a literal reading of the first two chapters of Genesis, never mind that the first two chapters of Genesis contradict themselves if read literally.*** In point of fact, evolution can shed no light one way or the other on the reality of the supernatural and its interaction with the natural world because, like any theory in the natural sciences, it gives natural explanations for observed natural phenomena. The realm of the supernatural is reserved for philosophy and, ultimately, theology.

When push comes to shove, truth cannot contradict truth. Either Christianity is true (as I belive), or it isn't. Either evolution is correct (again, as I believe), or it isn't. If both are true, then the latter can fit within the former. However, if the truth of one proves the falsity of the other, I suspect Christianity (or any other religion, for that matter) is not long for this world.

*This includes many Catholics, though Catholic teaching has never stated that the Bible must be interpreted literally. Indeed, such Catholic thinkers as St. Augustine, John Henry Cardinal Newman, and Benedict XVI have not held to a strictly literal reading of Scripture.

**While it is legitimate to interpret certain passages of Scripture figuratively, or allegorically, not all passages of Scripture can be so read without gutting the whole of Christianity. For instance, the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ cannot be read figuratively without gutting the substance of Christianity.

***If you don't believe me, read them closely.