What were the initial Christian responses to Darwin?

Misconceptions

Many believe that before Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, Christians as a whole maintained an entirely literal, six-day interpretation of Genesis in which the earth was only a few thousand years old. In fact, however, the idea of an old earth had already become increasingly popular among Christians throughout the half century leading up to The Origin of Species.

A second misconception is that Darwin’s theory of natural selection was met with immediate hostility from the Christian church because it did not align with the biblical description of how Adam and Eve were created. While Darwin’s explanation of human origins did inspire significant discussion, the bulk of the theological controversy revolved around two other issues: the concern that Genesis seemed to describe a creation in decline instead of progress, and the broader question of reconciling Darwin’s mechanism of evolution with the character of God revealed in Scripture.

Yet a third misconception is that the arrival of Darwin’s theory led the scientific and theological communities to take up positions opposing each other. The reality is that it would be decades before significant scientific objections to Darwin’s theory began to dissipate. Many well-informed theologians at the dawn of the twentieth century objected to evolution because they were aware that scientists at the time were themselves skeptical about Darwin’s theory.

Pre-Darwinian Interpretations

Darwin did not invent the idea of evolution. By the time The Origin of Species was published, the idea of evolution in many natural processes was already popular, and the term development was used in its place for discussions of society’s change or the history of the solar system.¹ What’s more, it was widely accepted that the earth was much older than previously thought. Most of the groundwork for this understanding resulted from geological work done earlier that century. By a study of the fossil record, naturalists encouraged the major shift from the view of a young earth to an old one.

Interestingly, most Christians at the time were happy to align their understanding of Scripture with this discovery and usually took one of two mainstream views.² The first of these, the Day-Age view, claims that each of the days in the Genesis creation account refers to a much, much longer span of time (thousands or millions of years). The second view, known as Gap Theory, claims that although God was creatively active in increments of 24-hour days, the scriptures skip over a vast period of time between God’s initial creation of heaven and earth “in the beginning” and the later Edenic creation associated with Adam and Eve.

Initial Responses to Darwin

In light of the popularity of views like the Day-Age and Gap Theory interpretations, Darwin’s theory of evolution could be reconciled with the origins accounts in Genesis. We must note, however, that while many people accepted Darwin’s argument for common ancestry, many rejected the idea of natural selection for a variety of reasons, some scientific, others theological or philosophical. For many, the best answer was to accept common ancestry but to supplement natural selection with other, more purposeful, mechanisms, including help from God.³

In the decades after Darwin’s theory was published, theologians began to ponder the compatibility of Darwin’s theory and Christian doctrine. Some viewed evolution as God’s method of creation. Others argued that since Darwin explained away the apparent design in nature, it was compatible only with atheism.⁴

Many resisted evolution specifically for the human species. Some of their hesitancy was due to concerns that evolution could undermine morality, or that evolution could conflict with Christian claims that human beings are created in the image of God.⁵ With time, even some of the more conservative theologians became comfortable with some aspects of Darwin’s theory.

Aside from the concerns with Darwin’s theory of evolution, by the end of the nineteenth century there was almost no work being done to argue directly in favor of a young earth. Enthusiasm for this view was largely confined to the Seventh-day Adventists who followed the writings of their founder, Ellen G. White. She claimed to have seen the creation of the earth in a vision from God. In another vision, God revealed to her that Noah’s flood produced the fossil record.⁶ Early Adventists could thus explain the geological data found in the early nineteenth century with a literal reading of the flood story of Genesis 6-8.

Rise of Young Earth Creationism

Between 1910 and 1915, a group of conservative Christians wrote a series of papers titled “The Fundamentals.” These papers clarified the beliefs of conservative Christians to preserve the faith from the threats of the time.⁷ Interestingly, “The Fundamentals” put no emphasis on Noah’s flood as an explanation of geological data and included contributors who accepted an old earth. Even William Jennings Bryan, a conservative Christian who crusaded against the teaching of evolution in public schools, accepted the Day-Age interpretation.

Nevertheless, the modern Creationist campaign gained traction as an anti-evolution movement in the following years. By the early 1960s, the flood geology promoted by Seventh-day Adventists was becoming the mainstream belief of anti-evolutionists.

The 100th anniversary of Darwin’s publication in 1959 brought with it a cry from academics to make the public more aware of Darwin’s theory. Around the same time, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, which threatened the United States’ leadership in science. As a result, the government funded the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS), which produced a series of textbooks that taught evolution without reservation.⁸ Many conservative Christians at the time saw this as an attempt to “ram evolution down the throats of children.”⁹

As if in response to this outcry, John Whitcomb and Henry Morris updated Adventist flood geology in their 1961 book, The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications.¹⁰ Whitcomb and Morris explained in detail how Noah’s flood could account for the geological evidence for an older earth. Soon after, small groups of conservative Christian scientists began to form in support of this research. They came to be known as Young Earth Creationists and referred to their flood geology as scientific creationism. To gain acceptance in public school science curricula, they sometimes prepared editions of their books in which all references to the Bible were dropped. The movement continued to grow, and by the 1970s the term “Creationism” had been reduced and redefined to encompass only the beliefs that were once reserved for a minority that consisted largely of Seventh-day Adventists.¹¹

Conclusion

Although Young Earth Creationism is today’s primary anti-evolution campaign, it has only been a popular Christian belief for the last 50 years. Just before and for 100 years following Darwin’s discovery, most Christians in the United States were comfortable with the idea of an old earth, and many found harmony with the scriptures through either the Day-Age or Gap Theory interpretations.