Fundamentalist Christians believe science and faith are mutually exclusive. Because these groups are so vocal,many assume that all Christians faith cannot accept logical explanations for the world as is and how it has become that from what it was initially. Verses are slung from the KJV and Christ's name seen is in opposition to great the scientific minds behind 19th century evolution.
The question becomes Faith or Darwin... so here's my question:
Considering the ideas of Darwin, how is a person of faith to be reconciled with the theories of evolution?
John Lennox argues that we essentially have two choices (1) In the beginning there were particles which somehow came together to produce life and consciousness and morality. (2) "In the beginning there was the word, and the word was God and the word was with God." {John 1:1} And from God came earthly life that has adapted with time and with change. Lennox points out that the longest word we know is the genetic word that determines the human genome, the Genetic Code.

Darwin is best known as a naturalist, developing his theory of evolution published in 1859, Origin of the Species.
Born Feb. 12 Shrewsbury, England, son of Robert, a medical doctor, and Susannah, in a home called The Mount.
In 1817, he attended a school run by Unitarian minister and had to cope with his mother’s death. His father, an atheist, withdrew him from that school June. In Octber of 1825, Darwin enrolled in the University of Edinburgh with his brother Erasmus, to study medicine.
He came from a long line of scientists: his father was a medical doctor, and his grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, was a famous botanist.
On March 27, 1827, he delivered his writings on marine animal science to the Plinian Society. In April, he left Edinburgh to travel to Belfast, Dublin, and Paris. In October of the same year, he enrolled in the University of Cambridge to study theology, thus beginning the line of inquiry that would result in his controversial theory. At age 22, in 1831, he took a scientific voyage on the HMS Beagle. In this 5-year voyage, he studied organisms and proposed ideas on their evolution in his Beagle Diary. These ideas would evolve into his theory, Origin of the Species, published on Nov. 4 1859.

According to Darwin, changes in an organism during its life do not affect the evolution of the species. Organisms are fundamentally different, even if of the same species. His famous idea, Survival of the Fittest, says that particular organisms within a species that develop more favorable conditions in the environmental niche will produce more offspring.
Evolution doesn't happen to any sort of plan, yet, over time, for example, the elephants' more favorable long trunks become the primary trait for trunks in the animal. The only thing that can be affected is which gene sets there are in a population, and this is determined by which individuals die and which ones live and reproduce. Because he had not studied genetics, Darwin observed that new traits were passed, but never understood how.

Darwin's ideas were not completely new, but were inspired by the publications of many scientist.
Yes, even the Father of Evolution had some inspiration outside of the natural world.
1. Thomas Malthus was arguably the most influential on Darwin's ideas. Malthus grew to fame as an economist with ideas that population had a limit based on external resources. Malthus' ideas were published in his 1798 book The Principles of Population, long before Darwin was even born. However, Malthus' ideas very much supported Darwin in his formation of the Survival of the Fittest theory based on his research on Galapagos Finches.
2. Comte de Buffon was a mathematician most widely know for his work to invent calculus, however he was the first to use biogeography as evidence for evolution. Buffon said that changes to an organism were entirely based on their living environment.
3. Charles Lyell influential geologist credited with theory of Uniformitarianism. He said that the same geological process occurring at the beginning of time still occur to date. Lyell originally said that small favorable changes, much like Darwin's idea for natural selection, affect a species over time.
4. Georges Cuvier was known in his time as a very religious and anti-evolution thinker. However, he did propose the idea that species cannot be classified on a linear system.

30 years before Darwin, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck developed his Theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics, published in 1801. Lamarck postulated the animals evolved
as a result of "blind primal forces," such as the need for food. Lamark said evolutionary changes are made to an organisms genome over time based on what a particular species wants and needs.
In the image a giraffe is shown. As this species' food source grew out of reach, longer necks developed in the genome. This was essential for survival. However, this differed from Darwin's theory, Survival of the Fittest. In Lamarck's statement, a single species simply adapted to their environment for their lifetime and passed that trait on to all offspring. The problem with his theory is explained through another example: A cat declawed in it's lifetime does not pass on the declawed trait to offspring. The trait is particular to that organism and does not produce a change in the species' genome.
Lamarck was more accurate with another of his ideas. Traits not used (a 4th ear, for example) by a species would eventually disappear in that species. So, according to Lamarck's reasoning, my offspring will be born without an appendix, little toes, and wisdom teeth. A third half-formed idea of Lamarck's was that of predetermined evolution, which Darwin considered and rejected.
He died in 1829, criticized by Cuvier (Ku-vee-air) for arguments lacking "deductive rigor." Although Lamarck's ideas were provocative, he lacked the scientific evidence that Darwin collected.

Darwin said that organisms, even of the same species, are all different and that those which happen to have variations that help them to thrive in their environments survive and have more offspring, another aspect of his theory of Survival of the Fittest. Lamarck's beliefs were fundamentally similar, but were left without backing, and were too simplistic in terms of an organisms' genome. Which, to be fair, neither Darwin nor Lamarck - whose theories were formed almost thirty years earlier - had any knowledge of genetics in any way. Gregor Mendel was the first to look into the genome in 1856, however his discoveries were not published until 1865. Darwin's origin of the species were published in 1859; and Lamarck's research began in the 18th century.

Based on the inspiration of those scientists, Darwin produced his theory for evolution of animals and plants. Regarding reproduction, he said plants are "simple animals". These ideas were not counter-Christian. Although his society widely accepted the 19th century belief that the world was created for man, Darwin saw this view as arrogant. He argued that the nature he studied offered to religion proof of a God in heaven, and man was just as noble and worthy as any other organism, but not greater than even a simple worm.

Today's scientist classify all organisms into species and strata and kingdoms depending on characteristics and behavior. How would a changing species (assuming species are ever changing) fit into that classification?
As we engage genetic modifications of fruits and vegetables, cross-breeding animals, and genetic manipulation of livestock, do Darwin's theories still apply? We have played God in manipulating Darwin's theory of natural selection to create fatter chickens and bigger cows to support our population of billions.

People of faith continue to struggle constantly with their belief in the existence of God and His word in the book of Genesis. This struggle comes from a literal interpretation of the religious and historical writings of the Bible.
Darwin recognized a higher power and wrote of one in his studies of life in nature.
Society makes the battle: Evolution vs. Faith. According to John Lennox, that is a face-off that is uncalled for in the Christian perspective. Richard Dawkins disagrees entirely, arguing that evolution - absent of a Creator - is the explanation of the existence of all of life."

Darwin's ideas are still debated by scientists and theologians today, as they will be decades from now. No one has the answers to questions of morals, it's opinion. Without answer of right or wrong.

Professors John Lennox and Richard Dawkins: Intelligent Design (ID) vs Natural Selection
---
Lennox quotes John 1:1 " "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" - He was eternal, all things came to be thru him.. God never came to be, he was.
Conciousness can be measured.

There are two ways to look at this theory:
Christians who believe in the Big Bang Theory see the colliding of molecules to make the earth as a collision pushed by the hand of God. From there, it follows logically that evolution from the primordial ooze may have been orchestrated by God. Perhaps, the Creator did not specifically align evolution before the world's beginning, but allowed it as a humble creator.
The Big Bang Theory is not only a humorous TV series, but a scientific postulate, of which we have no proof. Therefore, the belief in the Big Bang is much like an secular version of the belief in a God who created the universe. As written in Hebrews 11:3, "By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible."

Who created God?
According to Lennox asking this means you've immediately categorized God as created.
The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins is written on the basis that a God was created ("typically called an idol") It begs the question; which God created the God? The
Christian claim is easily stated as God wasn't created. In John 1:1, God as explained as the word and with the word. Lennox says, based on religion "God is eternal". Christians claim all things came to be through God, whom already was. That means there must be something that never come to be. Christians say YES, God never came to be because he was and through him all else came. Lennox claims this as an illegitiment question. To Dawkins, he asks "If the universe created you who created your creator?"
Christians: God is a trinity.. father, son and holy ghost
What is energy/consciousness?Beliefs don't have to be measured.

Evolution's standoff with faith is an incredibly weighted debate from the 19th century to this day. I've presented arguments toward secular evolution, ideas such as Big Bang, and arguments for predetermined life from a higher power. While this question can only be answered through opinion, my hope is that you take the opinions of others as well as knowledge of content to form your outlook on faith and evolution. Thank you.