Theology of Creation in the light of evolution: three scenarios

Creation: Evolution enhanced

The first option is as follows: God takes the dust of the ground, (general providence) and supplements natural selection by bringing into being particular probabilities in order to create human beings. This additional influence may be detectable (i.e. it is a case of special providence). As we saw earlier, Rolston describes this special divine action in terms of a temporal ‘opening up of possibilities.’ Haught, drawing from Whitehead’s process philosophy, considers it the effect of the ‘divine lure.’ Note: this option is dependent upon an unspecified account of special divine action.

Creation: At the mercy of evolution

The second option proposes that God takes the dust of the ground, and allows natural selection to run its course (general providence). There is no providential involvement or intervention. This means God is at the mercy of the significant contingency inherent in the process. Peacocke’s proposal could be viewed this way.

Creation: Evolution as the outcome of contingent general providence

These first two options mark out the two ends of a spectrum of possibilities. At the centre of this spectrum is a third: Much as the existence of liquid water can be said to be the contingent result of general providence, it is possible that the requirements for life are sufficiently tied to the laws of nature that it too can be considered the reasonable outcome of contingent general providence. Such an account has no need of additional divine influence because the outcome is sufficiently tightly constrained to achieve God’s purposes. If a divine influence were present, it would be undetectable.

 Printer-friendly | Feedback | Contributed by: Adrian Wyard