Confronting Evolution

I read with great interest about the recent discovery of a new hominin species, which will be called Homo naledi. It is my understanding that this isn’t merely a discovery of more fossils of a species we already knew; rather, it is the discovery of a new piece of the ancestral family tree. There is apparently a Nova/National Geographic program about the discovery, which is available to view online here.

I have to admit that scientific discoveries like this — which are extremely difficult to explain unless you accept evolutionary theory — always make me feel a little uneasy, because I don’t believe that Mormons (or Christians generally) are anywhere close to coming to terms with the theological challenges that evolution presents.

I am not merely referring to those Mormons/Christians who deny evolution outright (although I certainly include them as well). I am also referring to those Mormons/Christians who casually assert that God created through evolution — as if our theology can simply absorb evolution and continue on as if nothing happened.

There are numerous conflicts between Mormon/Christian theology and evolution. Some are easier to resolve than others. Personally, I see the most tension between the type of God that is described in Mormon/Christian discourse and the details of the evolutionary process.

Mormon/Christian theology teaches that God is both loving and omnipotent. Regarding God’s omnipotence, the Book of Mormon teaches, for example, that “God … has all power” (Alma 26:35) and “is able to do all things according to his will” (1 Nephi 7:12). Modern LDS Church leaders commonly refer to God’s power as “infinite” (see, e.g., here, here and here).

However, if evolutionary theory is correct (and it seems to me that the evidence in its favor is overwhelming), then the world was created through a system that depends on death, destruction, and violence of the strong against the weak. As Christian author Dinesh D’Souza describes it:

We live in a world in which organic design thrives on acute pain. This is not just the “way of the world”; this is the way in which living creatures in the world were literally made. It is a world in which the strong prey on the weak, a world in which survival itself is driven by unceasing predation, and in which nature itself is drenched in blood.  

It is extremely difficult for me to imagine how a loving God who “has … all power” and “is able to do all things” would have created the world in this way.

Christian theologian Wesley Wildman describes how Darwin’s view of God changed as he learned more about the natural world:

[T]o Darwin, God gradually came to seem less personal, benevolent, attentive, and active. Surely such a loving, personal Deity would have created in another way, a way that involved less trial and error, fewer false starts, fewer mindless species extinctions, fewer pointless cruelties, and less reliance on predation to sort out the fit from the unfit. Darwin arguably never lost his faith in God. Rather, he believed that God created through the evolutionary process, but his growing knowledge of that process dramatically transformed his view of God, which left him ill at ease with the anthropomorphic personal theism of his day and at odds with friends and colleagues who believed in a personal, benevolent, attentive, and active divine being.

I certainly understand why Darwin felt this way. However, are more optimistic perspectives possible? Is there a way for someone who accepts evolution as true (as I do) to reconcile the horrifying aspects of natural selection with a belief in a “personal, benevolent, attentive, and active divine being”?

Unfortunately, little work has been done in this area within Mormon thought. While LDS apologists claim that the Church has no official position on evolution, it has been my experience that most Mormons simply reject evolution outright (and view those who feel otherwise with great suspicion). In fact, the current Old Testament institute manual quotes Joseph Fielding Smith as saying:

[Y]ou cannot believe in [evolution] and at the same time accept the plan of salvation as set forth by the Lord our God. You must choose the one and reject the other, for they are in direct conflict and there is a gulf separating them which is so great that it cannot be bridged, no matter how much one may try to do so.

In an essay published in Dialogue, BYU biology professor Steven Peck takes a more constructive approach. He “assume[s] … that evolution through natural selection has been established as true … and that there is a legitimate, faithful response,” but at the same time he acknowledges the tension described above: “It is hard to imagine that evolution by natural selection is a reasonable choice for creation if other methods were available.” Peck suggests that perhaps “God … is subject to certain natural laws,” and that natural selection may have been “a natural law necessary for the creation of a diverse and fully functioning universe.”

This line of thinking has some promise. I see that Dr. Peck has written a new book, Evolving Faith: Wanderings of a Mormon Biologist (published by the Maxwell Institute, by the way) which I look forward to reading. I hope Dr. Peck develops these ideas further.

In the meantime, I will look forward to learning more about my Homo naledi ancestors.