no clash

Thus the Bible, and especially Genesis, does not clash with the theory of evolution. Genesis is a religious account, it is concerned with religious truths and nothing else.

A second field of apparent conflict has also appeared. What does the Christian think of polygenism (i.e. that 'Adam' was not the only ancestor of the human race), and monogenism (i.e. that 'Adam' was the only ancestor of man)? When the best modern scriptural and theological scholarship is summed up it seems that scripture and traditional theology do not decide either way. Many scholars have shown how the traditional Christian concept of the Original Fall can be reconciled with polygenism. (e.g. Renckens "Israel's concept of the Beginning"; or Alszeghy & Flick in "Gregorianum XLVII. 2"). With monogenism there is no problem. Theology, like science, is a subject which is always developing and on this particular subject of polygenism and the origin of man we need further thought, both as Scientists and as Christians.

Thirdly, there are some beliefs based on evolutionary theory that Christians must reject, not because of the scientific truth that may be beneath them but because of the philosophical and theological conclusions some scientists have reached. At this stage I do not wish to enter a discussion of the distinction between the material and spiritual. between Man's body and what has traditionally been called Man's "soul". They are both elements of the one thing, the human person. With regard to the evolution of man's body the Christian accepts or rejects theories according to the evidence, while not denying man's spirituality. No Christian can hold any completely materialist view of evolution. for this view makes man nothing but a complete and total material animal body who has sprung completely from an animal level.

Fothergill in Evolution and Christians says: "It is not a necessary unavoidable conclusion to draw, either from comparative anatomy, morphology and physiology, or from evolutionary evidence, that the mind of man is only a highly developed animal mind, or that it evolved from an animal mind. There is no evolutionary evidence of the gradual transition of an animal mind into a human mind, and no serious biologist would contend that there is. Although a great deal is known about the structure of the brain through which the soul works, and the normal and pathological status of many men has been studied. in effect there is still a very great deal about the human mind which we do not know. To prove that man's mind or soul has evolved it would be necesary to prove that this human immaterial soul is not different in kind from the sentient material mind of an animal. As this involves a contradiction, it could only be attempted either by proving that the mind is not distinct from the brain and thus solving the problem of mind and matter (N.B. a denial of the distinction, or of the existence of a problem, is not proof), or by denying and disproving the existence of what the theologian calls spirituality and intellectuality in man. Only a materialist would attempt to do this because a non-materialist realizes the futility of it."

The brain is the material vehicle through which the soul acts intelligently during life Thus one can hold that the human brain has evolved from a lower animal or whatever you like, but the spiritual element of man is individually created by God. The materialist evolutionist would here consider that if he shows the human brain has evolved then he has shown the mind or soul to have evolved too. But this position is forced on him by his initial postulate that only matter exists.