Why Evolution Would Empty the Christmas Manger

Two days after the presidential election, Garry Wills, a nationally syndicated columnist, lamented that religious voters had swayed the election. He was clearly disturbed that “many more Americans believe in the Virgin Birth than in Darwin’s theory of evolution.”

Later he continued, “Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth than in evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?”


Obviously Mr. Wills, though he calls himself a Catholic, departs from that bit of required Christian doctrine.

Evidently, one cannot be both “enlightened” and a believer in the Christmas story, according to Wills.

In many ways, I understand the dilemma. Sometimes I stop and ponder the Virgin Birth. I mean, I really stop and think about it: A woman became pregnant without the aid of a man?

It is inconceivable, pun intended.

Evolution, on the other hand, is also pretty weird: One species changes into another. A female became pregnant and gave birth to an offspring that has some strange new appendage that no one in her line has ever had? It’s inconceivable. And this happened millions of times over. At least with the Virgin Birth, it was only once.

But is there evidence for either of these scenarios? Yes. For the Christian, there is the evidence of the testimony of the early Christians as recorded in the Scriptures. There is further evidence in the ongoing miracles of the church throughout the ages.

With respect to evolution, to my “unenlightened” mind, the strongest indicators for it are the monkeys and apes. They are so eerily similar to man. It seems entirely possible that we could be related somehow.

Of course, there is more evidence than that, but I have not personally found it persuasive.

Evolution, if true, seems terribly cruel. Charles Darwin’s evolution is “red in tooth and claw.” The model nature thus sets for humanity is raw power and survival of the fittest.

Creatures are doomed to claw and tear each other to death for untold eons. And for what purpose is all this blood and suffering? So your teenager can buy an iPod?

The Virgin Birth, if true, is wonderfully sublime. Almighty God, the maker of the cosmos, humbles Himself to become one of His creatures, an infant — a poor one at that. A babe who is destined for the Cross to save us. Talk about humility.

It is totally the opposite of raw power and survival of the fittest. And the purpose of this incarnation is not how much stuff can we get before we die. The end is eternity walking humbly with your God and fellow saints.

I do sympathize with the unbeliever. Miracles are pretty hard to swallow and the Virgin Birth is a biggie. By definition, a miracle is something outside of the natural order, it is “outside the box.”

Materialists do not believe that anything can happen outside of the natural order, and they believe this simply because they say so.

They ignore all the evidence of miracles throughout history.

They are stuck in their boxes. This is an irony, as most materialists think of themselves as innovative thinkers. But their boxes constrain them more than they know.

It is the believer, the traditionalist, who truly thinks outside the box. The believer knows that there can be miracles. And, if a miracle is possible, why not the Virgin Birth?

You don’t get Christmas with evolution. The best its adherents have given us is the awful film by Stanley Kubrick,2001: A Space Odyssey and Earth Day. Evolution is a dreary, tedious, and messy theory. Even if it were true, as Alice Von Hildebrand said, I see no reason to be happy about it.

But God becoming man, I can rejoice in that. God, incarnate in His son, Jesus, walking and talking among us. I can rejoice in that.

God, incarnate in His son, Jesus, suffering for us and teaching us how to sacrifice for one another even unto death, I can most certainly rejoice in that.

The Virgin Birth gives us hope. And meaning. And Christmas.


    • Katherine Andes

      Thanks, April. I wrote it many years ago and it first appeared in The Fresno Bee. I have always been grateful that they’ve always published my faith pieces. Merry Christmas!

  1. Thank you, Kathy, for your sensitive and honest (and, these days, courageous!) article. As for me, a longtime Catholic, too, I see absolutely no contradiction between the truth of the Virgin Birth and the truth of evolution. For me, God is the loving author of everything, including all the solar systems and every last particle in them, as well as all the sciences, which I see as gifts from God, who graciously wants to give our tiny, inquisitive human brains some understanding of the infinite magnificence of His works — in our physical world! But God is also the creator of the entire spiritual realm, about which science can know and teach us nothing. Fortunately, for us to understand this “other” world (our ultimate true home), God has graciously provided us with the Holy Spirit, whose role is to enlighten us in all of God’s truths and ways — to give us the all-important Gift of Faith, without which none of us could say “Jesus is Lord.” Our God is indeed an infinite, wondrous, and endlessly loving God, who wants to care for every single need we have, from the spiritual to the physical — even to our niggling intellectual curiosities!
    Especially in this beautiful season, may He bless you and all your family with His comfort and joy and peace, which surpass all understanding.

    • Katherine Andes

      Al, for some reason my system didn’t notify me of your comment. I’ll have to look into that. Thanks so much for your reply. I actually wrote that piece about 15 years ago for a newspaper. These days I’m leaning against the theory of evolution … I appreciate your feedback!

  2. Peter

    Evolution has been proven false mathematically by William Dembski in 1998. Again twenty years later though a metaphysical argument by Wolfgang Smith.

    There does not exist a single proof, nor a single piece of evidence, that supports the hypothesis of macro-evolution (a new species coming into existence).

    All species were created in the beginning by God. He created everything in six days. Theistic evolution or ‘spontaneous evolution’ both invalidate Biblical and Church teachings.

    Einstein’s theories of Relativity (both the Special and the General) would support a 13.7 billion year existence of the universe, beginning with the BIG BANG. It supposedly makse evolutionary theory plausible by explaining the coming into existence of an entirely new species over long periods of time. However, we know of not a single new species having come into existence in recorded history, only of variations within existing species.

    Einstein’s theories of relativity have never been proven to be true. The opposite is true, there is enough evidence to contradict this theory. Dr. Wolfgang Smith has shown in his latest book that that there is no support (no scientific need) for relativity theories. He shows that Einstein had an ulterior motive to propose those theories and that this has held back science form making true scientific discoveries that might have been benefitted mankind. His motive was to keep God (the Creator of all that exists) out of the picture. It has cost tax ppayers all over the world hundreds of billions of dollars and wasted much time and talent for more that one hundred years. The consequences are not limited to a loss of time and money that could have been spent to improve the life of many people all over the world. Much worse by far is that the false theories have befuddled the beliefs of untold numbers of Christians discarding their belief in creation, the lteral belief in a first human pair, the fall in the garden of Eden and hence the need for a Redeemer, etc. One can easily conclude that there is no God and that we have all been fooled. Now, without God I can do whatever I want without fear for consequences of life after death. I am free, unshackled from any moral restraint! Be merry, enjoy, live as you like, for there is no life after this one. Make the most out of it.

    Well, now atheism has lost both legs that supported it; evolution to substitute for creation and the billions of years necessary to make it plausible. It is time again to start thinking again and ask the same questions of the ancients; where does it all come from and where does it all go? Heaven? Hell? Maybe. Pascal’s Wager could makes sense again. Perhaps even the Bible?

    • Katherine Andes

      Thank you, Peter, for your detailed commentary. I’m sorry I didn’t respond sooner. I just saw this comment. You make a lot of good points. I’m not smart enough to figure it all out scientifically, but I’m leaning strongly against the belief in evolution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *