Should Christians Embrace Evolution: Biblical & Scientific Responses [Paperback]

Norman C. Nevin (Author), Editor (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: May 30, 2011

We are witnessing an aggressive attack on the credibility of the Christian faith. Christians are increasingly called to embrace Darwinian evolution -- or acknowledge that they are altogether opposed to science.



But for the contributors to this volume, this is a false premise. Committed to the authority of Scripture, the need for careful exegesis, and the importance of rigorous scientific investigation, these thirteen scientists and theologians offer valuable perspectives on a controversial area of debate for concerned Christians who are determined to draw their own conclusions.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Helpful to [anyone] who wants to expose their thinking to top-quality, cutting-edge arguments." --Richard A. Carhart, Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Illinois, Chicago

"The experts in science and theology who have contributed [these] chapters . . . will be very helpful to Christians who are struggling to sort out conflicting claims and arrive at the truth." --Phillip E. Johnson, Author of Darwin on Trial, Cofounder of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture

Product Details

• Paperback: 192 pages
• Publisher: P & R Publishing (May 30, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1596382309
• ISBN-13: 978-1596382305
• Product Dimensions: 0.7 x 5.4 x 8.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (10 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #154,864 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

26 of 37 people found the following review helpful

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

By Peter Clarke

Format: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. Read more ›

8 of 11 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Theologically profound February 7, 2012

By Nord S Isacson

Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase

"Should Christians Embrace Evolution?" was highlighted in WORLD magazine as one of a pair of books that made their book of the year recommendation in 2011. It deserves that kudo.

The book's primary strength is in raising questions about how the premises of evolution integrate with Christian theology. Some examples follow:
1. Is death, suffering, and disease normative (evolution) or an aberration (creation)?
2. Does faith require external evidence to be credible (evolution), or is faith internal and thus prior to external experience (creation)?
3. What does it mean to be made in the image and likeness of God? Is it just a spiritual encounter with God (evolution), or does it include the totality of life, both spiritual and physical (creation)?
4. Was there an ideal state at the beginning of the world that causes us to anticipate an ideal state at the end of time?
5. Is there a sudden intervention at the end of time in Christ's return that mirrors a sudden intervention at the beginning of time?
6. Do the spoken miracles of Jesus (i.e. turning water into wine) parallel the spoken miracle of creation in Genesis?
7. Is it possible that the physical attributes of life in the Garden of Eden were fundamentally different than life as we know it now after the fall of mankind?

The strength of this book is to ask if there is a foundational split or dichotomy between the physical and spiritual aspects of life. If yes, evolution is fine. If no, creation works.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Highly Recommended January 3, 2013

By Tim Challies TOP 500 REVIEWER

Format:Paperback

Should Christians embrace evolution? It is an increasingly urgent question and one that seems increasingly difficult to answer. Like you, I have grown accustomed to hearing Christians declare that, in the end, it doesn't really matter a whole lot what you believe about creation, whether you embrace a literal six-day creation or a version that allows for some kind of evolution. If only it was that simple. The fact is that there are many other doctrines that lean heavily upon the doctrine of creation. As this one topples and falls, many other crumble along side it.

Just a couple of weeks ago WORLD magazine declared Should Christians Embrace Evolution? their book of the year for 2011. I received the book just days after and eagerly opened it up to see what the fuss was all about. What I found is a book that offers a series of biblical and scientific responses to the question of evolution. Edited by Norman Nevin, the chapters are written by a list of distinguished scientists and theologians.

What the book demonstrates above all, and what it demonstrates especially in the first half, is that there is far more to the issue of creation than merely whether the world was created in six days or six billion years. This doctrine of creation provides a foundation for many others. As we let go of a literal six-day creation, we find many other critical doctrines are in danger of falling with it. For example:

Was Adam truly a historical person who truly fathered the entire human race?
Did death exist before man's fall into sin? What kind of death came with the Fall?
Did God create a world in which death was, in fact, a necessary (and good!) part of the created order?...
Can one join Darwinianism and the Bible without inadvertently (but necessarily) slipping into Gnostic errors which downplay the physical in favor of the spiritual?
This is merely a sampling. The fact is that creation does not stand alone within the Bible; there is much that hinges upon it.

The book's second half turns to questions related to science and looks to homology; the nature of the fossil record; chromosomal fusion and common ancestry; information and thermodynamics; and other topics. Essentially, this portion of the book shows that those who hold to a young earth do not have to check their brains at the door. It is possible to be an intellectually-fulfilled six-day creationist (something Al Mohler has also demonstrated in this conference talk).

Putting the two halves together, we have a book that can be read through or that can be used for reference, to address specific concerns. It is a book to be read by six-day creationists who are eager to confirm what they believe and it is a book to be read by those who doubt six-day creationism or who have turned from it all together. Even if such people are not convinced by the arguments, at the very least they will find the debate framed in an honest and compelling way. It will show them the questions they need to be willing and able to answer if they are to remain faithful to Scripture.

Perhaps the golden quote in the book is this one: "Every generation of Christianity has its own stigma by which the believer's faith is severly tested." It seems increasingly clear that evolution is the great test of the early twenty-first century. We are being tested to see if we will capitulate, if we will feel shame, if we will allow the world to transform the church. Really, this is a test to see whether we will allow the Bible to be the norming norm, the ultimate source of truth that takes precedent over all others, or whether we will prioritize our own understanding of God's natural revelation. This book asks all the right questions and, as far as I can see, answers them faithfully. I highly recommend you keep a copy of it handy. Read more ›