Believe in evolution or believe in God: toward an open discussion about what evolution says about science, our culture and race
Today a majority of scientists, those who perform scientific research don’t have the luxury of deciding for themselves that they believe in the Bible or evolution. As part of their job description, they are required to believe in evolution, or at least not criticize the theory in public.
It’s not an easy decision for scientists, even if they claim to believe in the Bible. At least one highly respected scientist, has decided that it’s possible to believe in both the Bible and evolution, strange as that may seem. On the other hand, it’s not all that strange; their survival as scientists depends on it.
There is undue pressure placed on scientists to conform to evolutionary thinking, and give it credit that it really does not deserve. The result is that evolution and Darwin’s theories are credited with all kinds of discoveries that it does not deserve.
The problem with attaching evolutionary thinking to all of scientific discovery is that it’s really unscientific to do so, since evolution does not explain or support the scientific model that we assume is correct, that we live by in Western Society, including the idea that people of all races should be valued the same.
There are many scientists who have been open about this evolutionary reality, including geneticist Dr. James Watson, who with Dr. Francis Crick, worked out the structure of DNA (a remarkable achievement for which he was awarded a Nobel Prize).
During his visit to Britain in October 2007, Dr. Watson created a storm when he made comments on genetics that contained connotations of racism.:
“There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so.”
The implication was that those of African extraction are less intelligent than those of European extraction. It was an obvious conclusion. But that did not make it any less scandalous.
Most evolutionists in the U.S. would not share Watson’s view. But in fact, he is being consistent with evolutionary theory. If one believes that human beings have evolved from species of lesser intelligence, it’s easy to believe that intelligence is determined by external physical characteristics, including the color of one’s skin.
Another example of this contradiction is that evolution theory does not support the need to keep certain species alive, especially those that are endangered. According to Darwinism, if a species is endangered, it should be allowed to die and help the entire evolutionary process continue.
This does not describe our current model, which more closely resembles a Christian world view, which supports being a good steward of all creation. Keeping endangered species from dying off, seems to be a major past time for many people who don’t believe in God. It’s part of valuing all of the inhabitants of the world, all species.
It’s just done for a different reason: we need to keep all species alive, because they all have the same value, including the human specie. The good part of this thinking is that we should value all of creation. The bad part of this thinking is that humans are valued no higher than any other species.
It’s an abbreviated Christian model: it values creation. But it does not value humans any more than any other species. The result of this is that a gorilla in a zoo that is endangered, for people who don’t believe in God, is of greater value than that of a small child who falls into a gorilla cage.
This example is closer to evolutionary racist thinking, without mentioning that a black child is not worth as much as a gorilla in the Cincinnati Zoo. But the implication is just as bad, since many people did say or write (on Twitter) that the zoo should have valued the gorilla over the child, and not killed the gorilla.
It’s more acceptable to say this in our culture because evolution is supposed to value all species the same, certainly not a small child more than a gorilla.
Apart from this incident, one can’t say that a boy of this particular race is inferior, because it would be considered racist. People who are not Christians, in most cases, have to act like they are Christian; they have to act like all of the other races of people have the same value.
This does not stop them from believing in evolution. They just believe in evolution in some circumstances and not in others.
If one believes in Genesis, however, thinking that all people have the same value is easy. We all came from Adam; we all descended from Noah’s three sons. So we are all related.
It’s important for Christian scientists to be able to distinguish between how evolution and Christianity value people, humans, differently, and how each world view aligns with reality.
© 2019 Larry Ingram
Based in St Louis,
Larry Ingram writes about the news media, movies and culture, as well as on topics like race, privilege, Christianity, religious expression and tolerance.
Many news articles are blatantly biased against Christians and conservatives in the news media, movies and culture.
Read his exclusive articles and columns that bring balance to mainstream, leftist and liberal thinking on a variety of topics.