James W. Grier column:
The Forum - 10/03/1999
Hawley, Minn.
I consider myself to be a Christian and a biologist who
firmly believes in evolution. I resolved in my own mind
years ago that there was no serious conflict between the
two. Similarly, most of my colleagues and students
(including many serious, conscientious Christians) seem
to have few problems with the matter.
However, the issue keeps cropping up periodically and I
occasionally encounter a colleague, student in a class,
or someone from the public on one "side" of the issue or
the other for whom it is a problem.
When I first started teaching at North Dakota State
University in the 1970s, and after having questions from
a number of students, I took a closer look at everything,
read extensively on the matter, including historical
information and diverse opinions, and had discussions
with several colleagues, pastors, students, and others. I
concluded or reaffirmed, that the so-called conflict
between science and religion over the issue of evolution
is an empty debate that has been generated in part by
different interpretations, if not misinterpretations, of
both the Bible and evolution.
Special creation appears to be relatively recent
(probably within the last 1,500 years) biblical
interpretation. Persons alive when the creation account
originally was written and up until the last 1,500 years
or so apparently were not concerned with scientific
accuracy in the same sense that persons today are. The
special creation interpretation made sense to persons who
were not aware of the vast expanses of geological time.
The idea that species suddenly appeared from nowhere
prevailed both in religious as well as nonreligious
contexts. In a nonreligious context, for example, one
could find a similar notion called spontaneous
generation. That idea arose from the familiar experience
of seeing such things as mice appear in grain sheds and
maggots in meat.
Unfortunately, once a special creation view appeared and
became popular, it was passed on and developed a cultural
momentum which has carried it up to the present day (now
under the contemporary name of "creationism").
Special creation is often presented as the only valid
view and forced into other issues such as public
education. It also often carries the implication that one
is not a Christian unless that viewpoint is accepted. As
a consequence, many people are either turned off or
confused by the matter.
However, a careful reading of the Bible shows that
Genesis does not require the special creation
interpretation. In fact, Genesis can be viewed as being
just as compatible with evolution! In the first chapter
of Genesis (any translation, including King James), the
Bible states, "Let the earth (verse 1:11) and waters
(1:20) bring forth ...," "(organisms) yielding fruit each
according to its kind" (1:11). The phrase "each according
to its kind" which forms the basis of the special
creation view, is clearly referring to reproduction
(yielding fruit) the first time it is used (verses 11,
12) rather than the original appearance of the species.
It is reasonable to assume the same in subsequent verses
(1:21, 24 and 25). If so, the only part that differs from
a modern biological view is the sequence of appearance of
different organisms, with flowering plants, for example,
coming before aquatic creatures. That seems to me like a
minor problem relative to the rest of the debate.
There are a number of other, similar points (on the
length of "day," literal vs. figurative prose, and the
role of "chance") that I wrote about for concerned
students in the first edition of a college textbook on
animal behavior, published in 1984. I dropped the matter
in the second, 1992, edition because it was no longer of
concern or interest to many students (although the topic
of evolution itself remains a central theme of the book.)
A slightly modified, stand-alone version of the
discussion is available on the Internet ([web address*])
for anyone who is interested.
I would encourage people to move on to other issues in
science, religion and human existence. Rather than
dwelling on the past and our origins, for example,
perhaps we should consider where we are heading in the
future, sustainable use of resources, and relationships
with other people on a crowded planet.
(Grier is professor of zoology at North Dakota State
University, and a member of a rural Lutheran church near
Hawley. He has an international reputation for his work
with eagles.)
*(return to web address:
www.ndsu.edu/instruct/grier/evolution.html)
James W Grier