Should Christians Embrace Evolution? [Paperback]

Norman C Nevin (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: November 20, 2009

Thirteen scientists and theologians examine the claim that Christians must either embrace evolution or be opposed to science. They set out a clear framework for relevant biblical, theological, and scientific issues and answer crucial questions.

--This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition.

Editorial Reviews

Review

This is a most helpful compilation, which is designed to make one think very seriously about the whole issue of evolution and the Bible. To those who love the Scriptures, and seek to be faithful to them, this will prove enormously helpful. --Rt. Revd. Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes --This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition.

Product Details

• Paperback: 192 pages
• Publisher: Intervarsity Press (November 20, 2009)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 184474406X
• ISBN-13: 978-1844744060
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.4 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,003,054 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

18 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Should Christians Embrace Evolution, August 2, 2011

By 

Peter Clarke (Lausanne, Switzerland) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Should Christians Embrace Evolution: Biblical & Scientific Responses (Paperback)

This book is a concerted multi-author attack on a well known book, by Denis Alexander: "Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose". Despite the unity provided by the single enemy, the book is very diverse, covering a broad span of theological and scientific subjects, and with chapters of unequal merit. I here focus on just the two chapters on molecular genetics, by Geoff Barnard. I would have preferred not to give a star-rating, because I do not feel competent to review all aspects of the book, but the Amazon website requires one. Therefore, in view of the faults of Barnard's chapters, and some other weaknesses that I notice at a more superficial level, I give it only two stars.

The two chapters by Geoff Barnard have a common aim: to refute the claim that man and higher apes have a common ancestry. In my opinion both chapters are seriously inadequate, for the reasons that follow.

Chapter 9C ("Chromosome Fusion and Common Ancestry"), the first of Barnard's two chapters, deals with the claim of Alexander (and virtually all evolutionary biologists) that DNA sequences provide strong evidence that chromosome 2 of humans was formed by the fusion of two ancestral chromosomes that persist in chimpanzees and other modern apes (designated 12 and 13, or in modern papers 2p and 2q). Alexander's argument is that chimpanzee chromosome 2p is strongly homologous with one part of human chromosome 2, that chromosome 2q is strongly homologous with the other part, and that the joining region in humans contains telomere sequences that would normally be at the end of a chromosome but are found in the middle of human chromosome 2, exactly as one would predict from the chromosome fusion hypothesis. Barnard accepts all of this! And he agrees that human chromosome 2 was formed by the fusion of 2p and 2q. All he does to contradict Alexander is to bring up three marginal questions. First, he mentions some difficulties to do with "alphoid sequences" that seem to me irrelevant in view of the fact that he accepts the chromosome fusion. Second, he mentions "human-specific" inversion in chromosomes 1 and 18, but I fail to see the relevance of this to the chapter's theme of chromosome fusion or more generally to the thesis of common descent. Then, finally, in the very last sentence he writes "What is certain, however, is that the wide variety of chromosome variations that clearly exist between the human and chimpanzee, dictate against the thesis that these species have common ancestry." This last sentence amazes me, partly because the chromosome variations are rather small (2% at the DNA sequence level), and even more so because Barnard has said almost nothing about the size of the variations in his chapter.

Chapter 10 ("Does the Genome Provide Evidence for Common Ancestry"), the second of Barnard's chapters, deals with the whole range of genomic data that Alexander presents as evidence for common descent: pseudogenes, mobile genetic elements and retroviral insertions. For brevity I here focus on the latter. When retroviruses infect a cell, they insert their DNA in the genome of the host cell, and the cell's descendants are thereby labeled recognizably from the presence of the retroviral sequence at a very precise place in the genome. When the cell is a germ cell, all the progeny are thereby labelled. Remarkably, the pattern of labelling is exactly what we would expect from a standard evolutionary picture. Thus, some insertions occur only in humans, others in humans and chimpanzees but not other primates, others in all primates, and so on. But you never find, for example, an insertion in humans and macaques but not chimpanzees. All of this is very strong, and direct, evidence for the common descent of humans, chimpanzees and other primates, and it presents a major problem for anti-evolutionists. Barnard's solution is to accept most of the data but to explain it away by claiming that particular retroviral sequences go very specifically to a precise location in the DNA. Thus, he claims (without evidence) that the presence of the same retroviral DNA sequence at EXACTLY the same location in chimpanzees and humans is due to the fact that one virus infected a chimp germ cell, another infected a human germ cell, and their identical sequences went to identical places in the genome. Such amazing precision is not biologically credible. An enormous amount of research has been done on retroviral infections, and all the evidence is against Barnard's claim. It is true that the distribution of retroviral insertions is not totally random. Some tend to go near active genes, others near inactive ones, etc. But in claiming a "very precise" specificity in retroviral insertion location Barnard is misleading the reader very seriously. Without this blatantly false claim his case collapses.

Whatever may be the merits or faults of the other chapters, those on molecular genetics are weak and misleading.

4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Disappointed, October 12, 2011

By 

Ian Gould - See all my reviews

This review is from: Should Christians Embrace Evolution: Biblical & Scientific Responses (Paperback)

I found this a difficult book to read for a number of reasons, not least of which is my lack of technical knowledge of the topics the various authors were addressing.
While I personally reject theistic evolution, I must echo some of the critical comments of other reviewers. Some of the arguments raised in the book seemed to me to point to the opposite conclusion that the authors came to. Other arguments didn't seemed to reach a conclusion, being left "hanging in the air".
The chapters were increasingly "over my head" with my limited knowledge. This is obviously my weakness, not the weakness of the authors.
One matter that was touched on -but not explored- was the potential impact of further evolution of the human species on theology. If evolution were true, presumably we have not yet reached the limits of evolution, and can expect to evolve into new species at some point in the (distant) future. What then becomes of the Christian doctrine of Salvation (and associated doctrines)? I would have liked to have seen this concern addressed as it seems to me that this is potentially far more important than what may have happened in the past.

5.0 out of 5 stars The Best Defense, January 17, 2012

By 

Russ White "Russ White" (Holly Springs, NC USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Should Christians Embrace Evolution: Biblical & Scientific Responses (Paperback)

Is deistic evolution really a solid Christian stance? While evolution is on its last legs as a scientific theory, it is ever more pervasive in popular culture. If you don't <em>believe</em> in evolution, you are dumb. Or so the popular sentiment goes. Because of this popular attitude, many Christians have caved in to evolutionary belief, integrating it into their Christianity, rather than critically examining it.

After all, you don't want to be dumb, do you?

Should Christians Embrace Evolution challenges this line of thinking by asking the question: can a Christian believe the Scriptures are true and evolution is true at the same time? The answer, told from eleven different perspectives, is a decided <em>no.</em>

The book starts out with an essay by Alistair Donald discussing the historical context of the debate over evolutionary theory, specifically how the Church has related to the theory of evolution over the decades. There is a mythical history about that high level, intelligent Christians have "always" accepted evolution; this chapter puts that myth on notice. In the next chapter, Alistair McKitterick discusses the intent of the author of Genesis --a well placed question on the hermeneutics of the book impacting our reading of the creation narrative. Is the creation story a myth? Demythologized text? In chapter 3, Michael Reeves addresses the question of Adam and Eve. Were they real people? Chapter 4 discusses the fall and death in Paul's writings, and how this relates to our understanding of the fall narrative in Genesis 3.

Chapter 5 addresses the heart of the question: can a Christian accept evolution? David Anderson argues the answer is no, grounding his argument in the proposition that combining Christianity and evolution always results in essentially gnostic errors. Andrew Sibley next argues that the combination of evolution and Christianity ultimately reflects on the character of God and his trustworthiness. R.T. Kendell argues in chapter 7 that every generation of Christians has a "stigma," or a test, which it must endure in order to be found faithful, and that evolution is this generation's test. Steve Fuller discusses the impact of evolution on the image of God in man's creation in chapter 8, presenting an argument he believes will provide a winning hand for intelligent design theory.

The book next turns to specific points of evolutionary theory in chapter 9 with Norman C. Nevin's essay. He covers the concept of homology and the fossil record. The chapter continues with an essay by Geoff Bernard on chromosomes, and then an essay by Andy McIntosh on information theory and the second law of thermodynamics. Geoff Barnard discusses the evidence of the genomic record and its relation to evolution in chapter 10, focusing on changes in pseudogenes. Finally, in chapter 11, John C. Walton discusses the part chance plays in evolution.

This is, perhaps, one of the strongest collection of essays entered into the Creation/evolution debate in recent years, and well worth reading from first page to last.