Teaching & Learning Guide for: Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?
Authors: Dawes Gregory W. 
Published: April 2008

Author's Introduction

The article was provoked by recent discussion of the so‐called ‘conflict thesis’: the idea that the Christian faith and the findings of modern science are necessarily at odds. This thesis is generally attributed to John William Draper (1811–1882) and Andrew Dickson White (1832–1918). Recent opposition to their work dates from a 1979 publication by James Moore. Moore argues that the warfare metaphor employed by Draper and White misrepresents the historical reality, by suggesting that the religion and science debates were clashes between distinct groups of people who were sharply polarized and violently antagonistic. Since then, similar criticisms have been made by historians, such as David Livingstone, Ronald Numbers, and David Lindberg.

A key question here is: what does the conflict thesis entail? If it holds that Christian thinkers have invariably opposed scientific progress, while the defenders of science have been non‐believers, it would be demonstrably false. But there exist more interesting forms of conflict thesis, which are philosophical rather than historical. These suggest that there is some tension between what Christians have traditionally believed and the findings of modern science, particularly Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Even if the two are not, strictly speaking, incompatible, the truth of one may constitute evidence against the truth of the other. Darwin's theory also undercuts traditional arguments from design, and highlights the epistemological divide between religious and scientific conceptions of authority.

Online Materials

The following sites contain audio and video files, as well as text and images.

1. http://www.meta‐library.net/history/intro‐frame.html

This is a useful overview of the historical debate by Ronald Numbers, with links to other sites. Most presenters follow Moore in opposing the conflict thesis, narrowly defined, but neglect the conflicts that my article highlights.

2. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html

Here one can view an excellent, 2‐h PBS television documentary on the Dover, Pennsylvania trial in December 2005 regarding the teaching of ‘intelligent design’ (ID) in public schools.

3. http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/rel_evol_sun.htm

This is a letter signed by more than 11,000 clergy, arguing that there is no conflict between religion and science, and encouraging (among other things) the liturgical celebration of evolution by natural selection.

4. http://www.discovery.org/csc/

At the other end of the theological spectrum, this is the website of the Discovery Institute, devoted to opposing Darwinism and promoting ‘intelligent design’ (ID). Controversially, it presents ID as a scientific theory, rather than a religious doctrine.

5. http://www.asa3.org/

Somewhere between the Clergy Letter Project and the Discovery Institute lies the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA). The ASA ‘does not take a position when there is honest disagreement between Christians’, so it embraces a variety of perspectives.

Sample Syllabus

The following could form the basis for a graduate seminar on religion and science, focusing on the Darwinian controversies. One could, for instance, devote two classes to each of these topics.

1. The Draper‐White Thesis

I recommend reading extracts from the two writers thought to be responsible for the conflict thesis, to establish what each actually said.

John William Draper, The History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, International Scientific Series 13 (London: Henry S. King & Co., 1875), chap. 8.

Andrew Dickson White, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896; New York, NY: Dover Publications, 1960), vol. 1, chap. 1.

2. Criticism of the Draper‐White Thesis

Either of the following readings from historians critical of Draper and White's work would be a useful starting point for discussion.

James R. Moore, The Post‐Darwinian Controversies: A Study of the Protestant Struggle to Come to Terms with Darwin in Great Britain and America, 1870–1900 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), chap. 1.

David N. Livingstone, ‘Re‐placing Darwinism and Christianity’, in David C. Lindberg and Ronald L. Numbers (eds.), When Science and Christianity Meet, pp. 183–202 (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2003).

3. The Incompatibility Thesis

Many authors attempt to show that Darwinism and Christianity and compatible. But it would be useful to examine Pope John Paul II's statement on this topic, along with some responses by biologists and philosophers.

John Paul II, ‘The Pope's Message on Evolution and Four Commentaries’, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 72:4 (1997): 375–406.

4. The Evidential Thesis

Students might enjoy reading and discussing the following article by a leading evolutionary biologist.

George C. Williams, ‘Mother Nature Is a Wicked Old Witch’, in Matthew H. Nitecki and Doris V. Nitecki (eds.), Evolutionary Ethics, 217–31 (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1993).

5. The Replacement Thesis

This is an important but often neglected book. Students would benefit from reading at least the first chapter.

Neal C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1979), chap. 1.

6. The Faith and Reason Thesis

The following article by a well‐known historian and philosopher of science touches on some of the key issues.

Ernan McMullin, ‘Evolution and Special Creation’, Zygon 28:3 (1993): 299–335.

Focus Questions

There exist many Christian thinkers who accept Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Does that mean there is no conflict between Darwinism and Christianity?

Taken at face value, Genesis 1–3 tells the story of the origins of the world and of human beings. What aspects of that story would you consider essential to the Christian faith?

If we have an entirely natural explanation of the origins of complex living organisms, do we still have reasons to believe in a creator God?

If God could have created complex living beings by a simple command, why would he choose a lengthy and wasteful process such as natural selection?

Could a Christian regard the existence of God in the same way as a scientific hypothesis, that is to say, to be accepted only in so far as it is supported by the evidence?

Seminar Activity

I would suggest a debate, in which students sympathetic to the creationist position are asked to defend Darwin's theory, while students sympathetic to evolution are asked to argue against it.