Are there studies on the spectrum of religious views regarding evolution?

[Shemjaza]

Back to the original question, I know fundamentalist and evangelical Protestants, LCMS, LWELS, (Lutheran-Missouri Synod, Lutheran-Wisconsin Synod) believe in a literal 6 day creation. They would reject evolution because it contradicts with their interpretation of scripture.

Depending on their view, the Eastern Orthodox Church and Oriental Orthodox Church may reject evolution.

I had a science teacher in high school, a VERY intelligent woman, who was an Evangelical Protestant, who rejected evolution. Her denomination is one of those evangelical sects that emerged in the last few decades or so.

My experience is that intelligence doesn't guarantee a consistent way of determining truth or facts, especially when it comes to deeply held philosophical or religious beliefs.

 

[RileyG]

My experience is that intelligence doesn't guarantee a consistent way of determining truth or facts, especially when it comes to deeply held philosophical or religious beliefs.

Ok!

I think she was very much aware of the facts of science. She knew her stuff. But, she was very sincere in her religious beliefs, which, more or less, influenced her personal beliefs, even if it went against what she may have (intellectually) believed.

I cannot speak for her. That is all.

 

[Aussie Pete]

This is a summary of attitudes to evolution from various religious groups including a range of Christian denominations.
Acceptance of evolution by religious groups - Wikipedia

On the issue of atheists and ToE - Atheists are often treated as if they are the keepers of the flame when it comes to Evolution. In fact belief in Evolution is not a criteria defining an atheist. It is entirely possible to be a legitimate atheist and not accept ToE. Evolution is a scientific concept which exists apart from any religious or non-religious viewpoint. Many Christians are comfortable with the concept.

The main opposition to ToE comes from, mainly US based, Fundamentalists.

OB

And me. Englishman living in Australia.

 

[ottawak]

And me. Englishman living in Australia.

Right. Opposition to the ToE derives mostly from a particular interpretation of scripture, available wherever Anglo-Protestant culture is sold.

 

[J_B_]

Right. Opposition to the ToE derives mostly from a particular interpretation of scripture, available wherever Anglo-Protestant culture is sold.

As I understand it, many Muslims, some Jewish groups, most Mormons, and a fair number of Orthodox reject evolution as well.

But again, I'm not interested in black & white, wholesale acceptance or rejection. In fact, it seems to me reviewing all the various disciplines incorporated into the field of evolution would preclude that.

But, as @DragonFox91 said, maybe my question is too narrow.

 

[ottawak]

As I understand it, many Muslims, some Jewish groups, most Mormons, and a fair number of Orthodox reject evolution as well.

That's true. People reject evolution or have doubts about it which are unrelated to a Fundamentalist intepretation of scriptures and whose wider views don't line up with the Fundamentalist political agenda, Generally "atheists" (including Christians who accept evolution as a scientific theory) don't have much argument with them.

 

[Astrid]

My experience is that intelligence doesn't guarantee a consistent way of determining truth or facts, especially when it comes to deeply held philosophical or religious beliefs.

In general though fundamentalist churchs do draw
their strength from the low rungs of socioeconomic/
education ladder.

We employed a maid from Philippines. I noticed
right away she is very smart. But so little education!
She was so surprised to lesrn the earth is round!

But she was eager to learn, so different from our typical
creationists

 

[Astrid]

.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Has anyone come across a study of the spectrum of religious views regarding evolution? Is anyone here even interested in that?

I found plenty of studies about who accepts it and who doesn't, how readily they accept or reject it, etc. I've found studies on the denominations who officially accept/reject it, and how that compares to whether their members accept/reject it. But I couldn't find anything regarding the different types of views the religious community holds. Most speak only of YEC or TE. Some occasionally mention OEC.

Obviously this forum is dominated by YEC, and most questions are addressed either to YEC from one side or to atheists by the other side*. However, being one who doesn't fall easily under either a YEC or TE label, I wonder if anyone has ever studied the spectrum of views?

*Note: YEC/atheist doesn't even seem a good dichotomy given a recent study (from, I think 2017) that found a respectable number of doubters of ToE among atheists. It seems, rather, the spectrum should flow from those who take Genesis as only allegory to those who accept it as history, or from those who accept all the theories that make up evolution to those who reject all of them ... and those who fall in between - things like that. Anyway ...

Are you looking for something like the table of comparison listed in the following article? Or is there some other nuance on how evolutionary belief is distributed among Christian denominations that you're specifically interested in?

What do Christians REALLY Believe about Evolution? | National Center for Science Education​

I studied some of this back when I was taking my Masters, but I've slept since then ...

 

[J_B_]

Are you looking for something like the table of comparison listed in the following article? Or is there some other nuance on how evolutionary belief is distributed among Christian denominations that you're specifically interested in?

What do Christians REALLY Believe about Evolution? | National Center for Science Education​

I studied some of this back when I was taking my Masters, but I've slept since then ...

It's an intriguing title, and so seemed to have some potential to answer my question, but unfortunately no. Thanks anyway.

Based on what we've discussed so far, I would conclude it's unlikely a study has been done in the way I'm thinking of it. Even further, it might be too difficult to accomplish. In part, I now doubt people have the scientific knowledge and acumen to answer what I'm asking. Of course, like Lake Woebegone, everyone at CF is above average and could easily answer, just not the general public.

 

[hedrick]

Often the surveys provide more than one alternative. I'm aware of at least the following:

• The early is 6000 years old
• There's an old earth, but God created species directly.
• Species developed via evolution, but God controlled it.
• Species developed via evolution that came from random mutations and selection.

 

[Gene2memE]

Has anyone come across a study of the spectrum of religious views regarding evolution? Is anyone here even interested in that?

No, but I suspect that part of the problem with what you're seeking is the sheer scope of it. Pulling together a survey that disparate and wide ranging would be a MONUMENTAL task. I'd imagine the cohort necessary would be a couple of hundred thousand people, if you wanted a truly global picture encompassing most religions and their various sects.

It would also probably be book length. I've observed that if you get three Christians in a room and ask them their beliefs about evolution, you'll end up with some people holding beliefs that are mutually exclusive (depending on what particular questions are asked). Cataloguing the extent of the belief spectrum would be SERIOUSLY challenging - not to mention rather like trying to nail smoke to a wall.

Another problem is that information is gathered about these sorts of things is generally pulled from surveys. It's really difficult in a survey to derive information about a spectrum of beliefs - largely because you only have limited space/time for questions and it's near impossible to be exhaustive. So questions usually concentrate on opinions along the broadest/best known categories.

PEW has a good write up on how their methodologies have changed concerning questions about human origins: The Evolution of Pew Research Center’s Survey Questions About the Origins and Development of Life on Earth

However, if you had the time and inclination, you could probably cobble together a reasonable composite of views from the WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic) nations, as that's where ~95% of this kind of research is conducted.

Biologos has done some work: A Survey of Clergy and Their Views on Origins - Articles
There are a few academic articles as well (Evolution & Religious Beliefs: A Survey of Pennsylvania High School Teachers on JSTOR). Google scholar and some freebie journal access (there are lots of ways around academic paywalls) might be productive.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It's an intriguing title, and so seemed to have some potential to answer my question, but unfortunately no. Thanks anyway.

Based on what we've discussed so far. I would conclude it's unlikely a study has been done in the way I'm thinking of it. Even further, it might be too difficult to accomplish. In part, I now doubt people have the scientific knowledge and acumen to answer what I'm asking. Of course, like Lake Woebegone, everyone at CF is above average and could easily answer, just not the general public.

Personally, I'd have to say that in reading your OP I'm not quite clear as to the exact bits of data you're after. Are you instead wanting a survey of the different views on evolution that can be found among religious people of any kind? ie. Muslims, Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Christians, etc.

Some study may be out there but I'd have to be clear on what you're looking for.

While we're still looking, I'll just drop this since I'm here:

Smithsonian article - Science, Religion, Evolution and Creationism: Primer

In the article above, they provide a small taxonomy of sorts and discuss it. I'd also add the particular view of Stephen Gould and Niles Eldredge who have promoted "Punctuated Equilibrium," but I don't know that any religious or Christian individuals subscribe to this alternative view of evolutionary theory.

 

[J_B_]

Personally, I'd have to say that in reading your OP I'm not quite clear as to the exact bits of data you're after.

Maybe that is because, as several have noted, it is a very expansive question.

No, but I suspect that part of the problem with what you're seeking is the sheer scope of it.

Probably so. Based on the replies, I did consider formulating a new question to come at this from a different angle, but I don't think that's necessary. I more or less have my answer.

 

[Belk]

Ok!

I think she was very much aware of the facts of science. She knew her stuff. But, she was very sincere in her religious beliefs, which, more or less, influenced her personal beliefs, even if it went against what she may have (intellectually) believed.

I cannot speak for her. That is all.

I had a similar experience. My high school biology teacher was a very intelligent man who had a great understanding of evolution. He always said that he knew that evolution was the best fit scientific explanation and it made perfect sense. He just rejected it because of his faith. A very interesting man to be certain.

 

[AV1611VET]

I had a similar experience. My high school biology teacher was a very intelligent man who had a great understanding of evolution. He always said that he knew that evolution was the best fit scientific explanation and it made perfect sense. He just rejected it because of his faith. A very interesting man to be certain.

I agree with him to a point.

But the theory of evolution is literally full of holes.

They just call them "missing links" or whatever.

 

[Belk]

I agree with him to a point.

But the theory of evolution is literally full of holes.

They just call them "missing links" or whatever.

I would of thought someone so focused on words would know how to use literally in the correct fashion.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.


I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the biology teacher had a much better understanding of the theory then you do and he did not think it full of holes.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would of thought someone so focused on words would know how to use literally in the correct fashion.

It is literally full of holes, but evolutionists can't see them, because evolution is now a game of connect-the-dots, where the holes are covered over by lines going from one dot to another.

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

No biggie.

I got a couple myself.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess the biology teacher had a much better understanding of the theory then you do and he did not think it full of holes.

It should be THAN, not THEN.

 

[Belk]

It is literally full of holes, but evolutionists can't see them, because evolution is now a game of connect-the-dots, where the holes are covered over by lines going from one dot to another.

No, if it was literally full of holes it would look like Swiss cheese. You are saying it is metaphorically full of holes meaning it has a lot of omissions.

No biggie.

I got a couple myself.It should be THAN, not THEN.

Gah! I always get those wrong. Hoisted on my own petard.

Regardless people who actually understand the theory do not agree with your assessment. I'll take their word over yours.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, if it was literally full of holes it would look like Swiss cheese.

Take a look at just the very beginning of this video:

Notice how the dots* are connected by blue lines?

In your opinion, those blue lines pass over and cover up how many missing links?

* chimpanzees -- bonobos -- humans -- gorillas -- orangutans