Of course it's a mistake to say that they're "easily" reconciled: There
are significant theological issues which have to be worked through. But such critics
of evolution usually aren't good at nuances.
> >When famed evolutionist George Gaylord Simpson noted that "Man is the result
> >of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind," he was
> >quite clearly denying the existence of a creator.
> >So was reigning Darwinian Julian Huxley on the occasion of the Darwin
> >Centennial in 1959 when he boldly claimed that "in the evolutionary pattern
> >of thought there is no longer either need or room for the supernatural. The
> >earth was not created. It evolved."
> >As the anti-evolutionists understand, the Darwinian position has grown even
> >more materialistic since the centennial. Says Richard Dawkins, the most
> >influential, if the least romantic, of contemporary evolutionary biologists,
> >"We are survival machines, robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the
> >selfish molecules known as genes."
Again we have the interesting phenomenon of non-Christian evolutionary
scientists suddenly being treated as theological experts when they claim that evolution
and creation are antithetical.
George L. Murphy