Where is God in the evolutionary process? Did he just start the universe with the Big Bang and then step back?
Listen or Read. Your Choice.
Before my unexpected “vacation” due to flu, one of my podcast listeners had asked for clarity on my series, Adam’s Evolutionary Journey. “After listening to Episode 3,” she wrote, “I was left feeling a little empty. Where is God in the evolutionary process? Did he just start the universe with the Big Bang and then step back?”
Good question! My short answer is that God guided evolution
at every step along the way. Now for the long answer …
A couple of years ago, the Discovery Institute mined its
scholarly depths to put together a 1,000-page book called Theistic Evolution.
For those of you who may be new to the origins discussion, Discovery is the
self-described hub of the Intelligent Design movement, and Theistic Evolution is
the belief that God used the process of evolution to create all living things, including
us. These days, most who hold that belief prefer the term “Evolutionary Creation,”
which Denis Lamoureux coined in his 2008 book of the same name. According to Lamoureux,
the noun “creation” should receive more emphasis than the adjective
“evolutionary,” and I agree. Unlike Theistic Evolution, the emphasis in
Evolutionary Creation is upon the Creator, not upon the process.
I also prefer Evolutionary Creation for another reason – one
that comes out clearly in the Discovery Institute book. Like any general term, Theistic
Evolution has been used to describe a range of positions, but in Discovery’s
book Wayne Grudem gives it a definition that few Christians would accept.
Namely, he says,
“God created matter and after that
did not guide or intervene or act directly to cause any empirically detectable
change in the natural behavior of matter until all living things had evolved by
purely natural processes” (Grudem, 67).
Strictly speaking, this “hands-off” description of God has
more in common with 17th-18th century deism than with Christianity.
A deist would agree that a supreme being exists, but after setting everything
in motion, the creator then allowed the universe to run its course without
interference. God is a disinterested observer, in other words. Creation thus
becomes an infinitely complex course of dominoes that God set up “in the
beginning,” and once he tipped over the first, nothing else was necessary to
achieve his ultimate end. To be fair, a few Christians do believe that God “front-loaded”
everything into his initial act of creation, and afterward didn’t need to be
involved. But in my experience, I’ve found them so few and far between as to be
negligible. Grudem’s “hands-off” definition of Theistic Evolution certainly
doesn’t describe the vast majority of Evolutionary Creationists. And since the
rest of Theistic Evolution bases its critique on Grudem’s flawed
foundation, the result is a 1000-page doorstop.
God could have pressed an infinite number of levers to influence the direction of evolution, and almost all of them would be indiscernible or unprovable.
The Discovery Institute’s main problem is that its pet
theory – Intelligent Design – attempts to prove that evolution exhibits signs
of design, which implies a designer. Of course, all thinking Christians agree
that God had a plan and purpose for creating, but can that fact be proven? To
do so, one would have to find evidence of God’s intervention, which explains
why Grudem inserts the caveat that God’s guidance must cause some “empirically
detectable change” in the natural order of things. So far, Intelligent Design
theorists have failed to find the evidence they seek, and the question needs to
be asked: Why must God’s involvement be something science can demonstrate? And,
going further, why would God provide scientific proof of his involvement? Would
that be beneficial for faith, or destructive of faith? Proverbs 2 encourages us
to search for understanding as for hidden treasure, with the promise that “then
you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God.” If the
evidence for God were obvious, we would take it as much for granted as gravity,
and faith would cease to exist. Blaise Pascal pointed out 350 years ago that if
God wanted to prove his existence, he could have revealed himself and removed
all doubt, as he will on the last day. In the meantime, “There is enough light
for those who only desire to see, and enough obscurity for those who have a
contrary disposition.” [1]
The critic may ask for explanations of the exact mechanism
God used to guide evolution, or for empirical evidence of his involvement, but
there is no one-size-fits-all answer, no matter how often the question is
asked. The Bible, for instance, insists that God controls the weather, and climate
instability is associated with many key developments in human evolution. [2]
Faith tells me that was one of the ways God could have guided the process, but
I can’t empirically demonstrate that proposition. God could have pressed an
infinite number of levers to influence the direction of evolution, and almost
all of them would be indiscernible or unprovable. Specificity is therefore an
unreasonable demand, since God didn’t see fit to reveal how he did things.
The entire history of this planet seems one of extraordinary coincidences. Whether one attributes all, some, or none of them to God, that conclusion is a matter of faith, not science.
Some may take issue with the general notion of God guiding
evolution. For a Christian, however, the idea is no more controversial than
saying that God guides us in our everyday lives.
For the sake of comparison to evolution, personal guidance provides
a good start. The late USC philosophy professor Dallas Willard outlined a few
principles in his book Hearing God, and as he made clear, God’s guidance
in daily life almost invariably comes through secondary, ordinary means – not
miraculous interventions. To the outside observer, such instances might appear
perfectly mundane, as if nothing out of the ordinary has happened. What’s more,
the non-Christian always will be able to offer a “reasonable” alternative,
usually coincidence. In any case, the analogy to personal guidance suggests
that God easily could guide evolution through secondary, ordinary means that
would leave no trace to the outside observer. The entire history of this planet
seems one of extraordinary coincidences. Whether one attributes all, some, or
none of them to God, that conclusion is a matter of faith, not science.
Returning to the original question, where does God fit
into the evolutionary process? While all evolutionary creationists agree that
God was involved, they don’t necessarily agree on the details of how that might
have occurred. Some insist that God had to intervene at key moments,
such as the creation of the first life form or the first humans. Others argue
about the method of God’s actions – whether they were miraculous interventions,
and whether science could detect them if they were. Without claiming to answer
every objection or to speak for anyone other than myself, I’ll sketch a reply.
I believe God guided evolution at every step of the process.
The Lord is intricately and intimately involved in his creation, not locked on
the outside looking in. In theology, this is the doctrine of God’s immanence,
or presence. Of course, since God is spirit, I’m not talking about his physical
presence. Rather, the term “immanence” recalls the great prophesy of Isaiah 7
that the evangelists
applied to Christ – he is Immanuel, God-with-us. This principle runs
throughout the Scripture from Abraham (Gen. 17:7) to Moses (Exod. 3:12) to Jesus
to the end of redemptive history, when “God’s dwelling place is now among the
people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself
will be with them and be their God” (Rev. 21:3). God-with-us is God’s
presence with his people. It’s his commitment to be with us and watch over us
and fulfill his promise to bring us back to himself no matter how far we wander,
just as the Lord promised Isaac (Gen. 28:15).
The problem with many people involved in the evolution vs. creation debate is that they focus so much on God’s transcendence that they forget his immanence. Yes, the Lord exceeds time and space. No, this does not banish him from his creation.
While the Lord transcends time and space, the doctrine of
God’s immanence tells us that he is involved in our lives. He isn’t confined to
the roles of distant observer and judge. The Lord is present with us, in
us, and through us. The problem with many people involved in the
evolution vs. creation debate is that they focus so much on God’s transcendence
that they forget his immanence. Yes, the Lord exceeds time and space. No, this
does not banish him from his creation.
God’s immanence equally applies to the creation. Genesis 1 compares
God’s work in creating the heavens and the earth to constructing a temple. [3]
In Genesis 2-3, the description of Eden shares much in common with both the
Holy of Holies in the temple and the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21. [4]
Commenting on Psalms 8 and 104, J. Richard Middleton notes, “All the earth is
holy ground or sacred space, intimately connected with heaven, the seat of
God’s throne. Indeed, the fact that God dwells in heaven is an articulation of
immanence as much as transcendence, since the creator has chosen to inhabit
creation.” [5]
God’s immanence precisely is God’s guidance, both of his children and
his creation.
At this point, it seems legitimate to wonder whether God’s
presence filled the earth after its creation. After all, following the
construction of the tabernacle and Solomon’s temple, God’s “shekinah” glory – a
visible manifestation of his presence – descended upon those sacred spaces like
a cloud. By the same token, humanity was barred from the garden after the “fall,”
and Ezekiel saw God’s glory depart from the temple before its destruction (Ezekiel
10). So God’s presence filled his earthly temple prior to humanity’s descent into
sin, and afterward God withdrew from us. In A New Heaven and a New Earth,
Middleton argues that such a scheme is too simplistic. [6]
In his view, the Spirit-filling is delayed until Genesis 2:7, when God breathes
his breath into “the man” and he becomes a living being. Thus, human beings
become “the divinely designated mediators” of God’s presence on Earth.
I don’t wish to disagree with that conclusion, which is
certainly correct, but a third possibility exists. The Spirit-filling indeed
was delayed until the creation of humanity, but that doesn’t preclude the
Spirit being present in a special way within the garden itself after the creation
of humanity. The garden narrative contains numerous hints of relationship
between the Lord and the first couple. Although necessarily speculative, I
would suggest that the Lord was present with early humans in a special way
prior to the fall. Through his Spirit, the Lord guided humanity to maturity, like
a loving mother taking her children under her wings.
Through his Spirit, the Lord guided humanity to maturity, like a loving mother taking her children under her wings.
Previously,
I leaned heavily on Proverbs 8 to explain humanity’s fall, and I think it
likewise sheds light on this question. In the poem, wisdom is personified and
speaks directly to the reader, a form similar to a Mesopotamian hymn in which a
deity praises himself in the first person. [7]
Christian interpreters traditionally have viewed the personification of Wisdom
in the poem as a type of Christ, who says that from the beginning of God’s
creative labors:
Then I was beside him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before Him, Rejoicing in the world, His earth, And having my delight in the children of adam. Prov. 8:30-31
“Rejoicing” here has the connotation of play, of laughter,
and the “delight” that Wisdom expresses is the same delight that God expresses
for Ephraim, “my dear son, the child in whom I delight” (Jer. 31:20).
As I see it, this was the condition in the garden before the
fall, before humanity was barred from God’s presence. God enjoyed and delighted
in early Homo’s development the same way a parent takes delight in a
child’s growth. But whatever fellowship the Lord had with the children of adam
during those thousands of years of immaturity was altered when we rebelled.
Those who are evil cannot look upon a holy God and live. God could no longer
laugh and play with us. Instead, he hid from us, for our own good. But, as
Jeremiah prophesied, no matter how often the Lord has rebuked his dear
children, his heart still yearns for us, and he will surely have mercy on us.
In the end, God will again play with his children. No longer
will he have to hide his face (Is. 45:15). When we finally “see him as he is,”
we shall laugh with him and delight in him forever, as he intended from the
beginning. The Lord’s creative purpose will inevitably be achieved.
[2] Susan
C. Antón, Richard Potts, and Leslie C. Aiello, “Evolution of early Homo:
An integrated biological perspective,” Science 345, no. 6192
(2014): 1236828.
[3] John
H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins
Debate (InterVarsity Press, 2010): 78-86.
[4] Gregory
K. Beale, The Temple and the Church’s Mission: A Biblical Theology of the
Dwelling Place of God, New Studies in Biblical Theology 17 (Downers Grove,
IL: IVP Academic, 2004): 66-80.
[5] J.
Richard Middleton, “The Role of Human Beings in the Cosmic Temple: The
Intersection of Worldviews in Psalms 8 and 104,” Canadian-American Theological
Review 2, no. 1 (2013).
[6] J.
Richard Middleton, A New Heaven and a New Earth: Reclaiming Biblical Eschatology,
(Baker Academic, 2014): 48-49.
[7] Bruce
Waltke, The Book of Proverbs: Chapters 1-15, New International
Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004): 392.
Jay Johnson spent 15 years as a journalist and publishing executive before embarking on a second career teaching English in the juvenile justice system. Jay’s love of kids and education took him to BioLogos in 2016 to research the connection between evolution, Young Earth Creationism, and the alarming loss of faith among the younger generation. Jay lives in New Mexico with his wife, Sue’llen, and a black German Shepherd named Luca.
My formative years were spent in ultra-conservative Amarillo, Texas, during the 1970s. My family faithfully attended a Methodist church down the street from our house, and this being the ’70s, […]
Post comments (0)