Is Evolution Your Religion?

darwin-fishPoets write about what they value and believe to be true, good, and beautiful.  The poem is not aiming at the reader’s head, but his heart.  In this sense, poetry can be worship.  The analyst, the scientist, the theoretician, and the mathematician each transcends the realm of his expertise when he ventures into poetic expression and composition.  Poetry can be rooted in the concrete or abstract facts of the world, but poetry necessarily crosses from observation into interpretation.  The form and genre of a poem answers worldview questions from the poem’s perspective.  This is how poetry points to what we worship.  Poetry reveals our religion, our God, our idol.

If all this is true about poetry normally labeled “religious” so that the worldview it propounds can be legitimately dismissed as “of religion and therefore not factually true,” then it is only fair to allow cross-examination.  If the shoe fits the accused, let the accuser try it on!

This poem, penned by the notable Timothy Steele, entitled Descent of Man, and published in the January 2015 issue of Smithsonian Magazine, is surely a religiously-motivated rhyme about Evolution.  Take a moment to click on the link to read it.  Notice the sense of awe it seeks to generate, the religious-worldview questions it tries to answer (man’s origin, purpose, ethic, and destiny), and the beautiful way the message is portrayed.  Evolution may not be a religion to all who affirm its central tenets, but for some it is.  Demonstrably.  Perhaps you are offended by such a notion.  Am I wrong?  Or is your religion unmasked?

This entry was posted in Evolution, Poetry, Worldview, Worship and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Is Evolution Your Religion?

  1. lukeholzmann says:

    The answer really depends on how you define religion, I guess.

    I’ve been tackling — and plan to continue to tease out — answers to these kinds of questions in my latest project. So, shameless self-promotion here, I give you

    In short: science ignores God because it is limited to the natural world and any time we talk about evolution, we need to be very careful how we define it. As I hint in the videos, the religious aspect is actually the philosophical naturalism, not “evolution” or “science” or any of those larger words. It’s the philosophy of naturalism that links arms most readily with religious thought.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s