Questions my students asked
Over a period of two years I spent many hours in my office at a liberal arts college in northwest Georgia talking with a variety of students who had signed up for my philosophy classes. Many students were not Christians but were very interested in spiritual matters. A number of these seemed to want to be Christians, but were held back by various questions.
1. Can I be a Christian and still believe in evolution?
2. Why would God send people to hell just because they haven’t heard about Jesus?
3. Why would a loving God let so many bad things happen?
These are extremely important questions.
If my students are indicative of what other young people in north America (not to mention the rest of the world) are thinking, they represent scores—or more likely hundreds—of millions who think very highly of Jesus and admire a great deal in Christianity but worry they can’t become Christians without surrendering their rationality (Question 1), their decency (Question 2), or both (Question 3).
Fortunately, there is no need for them to worry. Over the next few weeks I will explain why, starting with the first question, which I will address in this post and the next.
Question 1: Can I be a Christian and still believe in evolution?
As bloggers report, the tension between Christianity and evolution is a huge factor behind vast numbers of young folk abandoning their faith. Here is what they seem to be thinking:
Premise 1: All (or practically all) rational people accept that the species on earth today emerged through the process of evolution. a
Premise 2: No (or practically no) orthodox Christians accept that the species emerged through the process of evolution.
Conclusion: So no (or practically no) orthodox Christians are rational.
This is a good argument in that the premises provide very good support for the conclusion. The problem is that both premises are false.
The view that God used the process of evolution to create the species we see on earth today is called theistic evolution. Many orthodox Christians accept theistic evolution. I’m not aware of any very good reason for calling it a heresy.
(As is the case with inclusivism, whether or not theistic evolution is the correct view is, of course, a different question.) (If you want a test for orthodox Christianity, research the Nicene Creed and the primary heresy it refutes. Rejecting that heresy, Arianism, is a pre-requisite for orthodox Christianity.)
I’ll address the second premise in my next post.
Update: Other posts in this series:
Evolution Is a Poor Test for Rationality
Why would God send people to hell just because they haven’t heard about Jesus?
Why would a loving God let so many bad things happen?
Related Posts
About The Author
Dr. Mark J. Boone
Dr. Mark J. Boone is a teacher and researcher in philosophy, especially the history of philosophy, primarily the ancient and medieval eras, writing his dissertation on Saint Augustine. Dr. Boone is the Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Forman Christian College. Mark is an occasional book reviewer for the journal Augustinian Studies and has written articles dealing with Plato, William James, theology and the arts, and religious epistemology. In some of his precious little spare time Mark makes animated cartoons based on famous speeches and dialogues in the history of philosophy, available on YouTube and Vimeo under the username TeacherofPhilosophy.
Mark, regarding your statement that you’re not aware of a reason why Theistic Evolution could be consider heresy, that depends on what exactly you mean by theistic evolution.
I will agree that there is no conflict between what scripture says, and the idea that God orchestrated adn guided evolution as a process for developing the species. But, I think the introduction of specific animals on each day lends towards the exception that fish, birds and land animals may each have a common ancestor, but the scripture seems to suggest that each of those categories was started directly by God independent of the others. (though, I don’t know that you have to interpret it that way). It is however VERY clear that the introduction of humanity is something entirely different than the introduction of other species. I don’t think the authority of scripture can allow for humanity to be evolved from any other specifies. An understanding that is faithful to the authority of scripture must concluded that Adam and Eve were the original ancestors of ALL people alive and that they were uniqely and directly created by God. But–this is not something that rises to the level of salvation, so I agree, while the idea that man evolved from another species must be wrong, it is not technically a heresy.