Analysis: Considering science as a system of belief, Dalton’s atomic theory stood as the foundation of science. However, his theory was inverted after it was discovered that atoms are further divisible. In view of this, it also must be considered that through history, a single religion has stood as the authentic and the only accepted way of life (Chardin, 2002, 22-24). This is because of the fact that some of these religions have been surpassed by others that have appealed more to people. Hence, it may be asserted that it is the power and authenticity that people consensually give to a belief that makes it popular and widely accepted. An example of this is the manner in which major religions have evolved into another form; Judaism was first popular, then Christianity, and then Islam.

Considering the manner in which people as whole have come to accept this transition in belief and belief structure, it is also possible to consider the fact that in a sense evolution has taken place with religion itself. However, focusing more on Christian beliefs, evolution is something that was not accepted by the church.
In view of undeniable evolutionary forms in science and in religion, Teilhard de Chardin’s views are interesting. He seeks to explain to the scientist and to the believer how science and religion are related. In this attempt, it is apparent that Chardin has done a great deal for believers in Christ as well as believers in God in general.

Teilhard de Chardin has faced opposition regarding his effort of establishing common ground between the scientist and the believer because of the view that he has of God, Jesus Christ, Original Sin, etc. Strong believers in science might say that Teilhard de Chardin’s views are optimistic as far as molding Christianity to fit the truth that science provides.

On the other hand, believers assert that he has developed a twisted approach to Christianity, and that Chardin’s views are really the reverse of Christianity. However, if one were to take an unbiased view at his work, it would reveal that he has been quite logical in his approach to attaining the truth. Since it is the truth that everyone seeks, one is compelled to trust what Chardin presents. This is because of the fact that it is truth that Chardin seeks, and through his life experiences as well the reader knows what exactly he is after. After joining the Jesuit and becoming a priest, Teilhard de Chardin also pursued his education to become a geologist. This led him to understand the importance of evolution in addition to having a rich knowledge of religion, particularly Christianity. Making use of his foundation in Christianity was perhaps the root of Chardin’s ability to integrate religious thought in scientific belief. His understanding of ‘Original Sin’ as a core example is explained in scientific terms. In other words, the evil and chaos that the world has seen and still witnesses is his interpretation of it.
The evil the world witnesses today from a believer’s point of view is a result of the first sin, the Original Sin (Chardin, 1976, 68-70). Hence, Original sin has evolved from its original form and developed into the many different forms of sin that one witnesses today; it manifests itself in different ways.

Based on this understanding, Chardin holds that evolution of the Original Sin itself cannot be ignored, and this coincides with the evolution of man (Chardin, 1976, 96-99). Whether one chooses to accept this or not is a matter of one’s thinking. However, in a realistic sense, man has evolved; this evolution may not have occurred physically, but has certainly occurred psychologically (Chardin, 2002, 37-40).

In argument of this, one can assert that man’s thinking is not the same as it was thousands of years ago; he has changed significantly over the centuries passed and will continue to do so without anyone being able to stop this process. How then can anyone possibly deny evolution? If this argument from a psychological perspective is not satisfactory, it is worth considering man’s physical transformations as well.
These include the all important issue of life-span; apart from the contemporary efforts that have altered life-span over the past hundred years, there is a clear decline in man’s average life-span. In contrast with the biblical accounts of life-spans, contemporary man lives for fewer than a hundred years. This apparent evolution has scientific explanations, and so does it have explanations from believers.

While the scientific ones are rooted in several physical factors, the dogmatic one holds that it is because of sin that man has been cursed, and this is one of the many ways in which man has been cursed, starting off with Original Sin. In argument of this, Chardin would hold that it isn’t logical to think in those terms (Chardin, 2002, 41-42). If life for all men was so cursed why would God permit them to go on living anyway? Instead, Chardin provides an alternative explanation for the Original Sin. He holds that Original Sin is not really what people today make it out to be. Of course people do commit crimes that are counted as sins, but it is the environment so created that is sinful, and this understanding has come down from generation to generation; anything that one feels is wrong or bad, is called a sin and is believed an indirect cause of the Original Sin. However, consider all crimes one sees today as a result of situations in which human beings are places; consider a child born into a poor home, in which he has to chance of living a comfortable life. The only chance that the child might have of making a living is by committing crimes and becoming rich overnight. The opportunity that the child takes up could well define his fate and make him rich just like several other children are already because generations back their forefathers made use of opportunities. How does one correct that legally? How does the court bring one’s forefathers to justice? Certainly, a court cannot hold up someone because his or her father might have killed. How then does Original Sin have practicality here?

In view of the arguments made above, it also must be asserted that there is no attempt to deny the existence of an Original Sin. However, there is need to draw attention to the ‘universal aspect of Original Sin. This means that Original Sin has come down through one particular nation, and spread out to the rest of the world today. Hence, the notion of Christ saving the world too, by logical interpretation, should be considered as encompassing all of humanity and not a specific nation. This part of Chardin’s work is emphatic because he searches to establish a logical relationship between evolution (science) and Christianity. Since the consensual notion of Christ saving only those who were the promised ones or those that were aware of his teachings is a view that is devoid of logic, he holds that Christ is a universal redeemer, and that Christ as a major part of God’s plan is one who would come again to redeem all humanity and not just a single nation (Chardin, 2002, 174-179). In addition to the coming of Christ again being part of God’s plan, so is evil a part of God’s plan, and therefore a part of evolution as well. Hence, Chardin holds that evolution is a part of God’s plan. This is because if there was no evolution, no transformations from one state to another, no further intensification of evil and the like, there would be no need for Christ to come and judge the living and the dead.

Conclusion: To bridge a gap between any two theories or beliefs is a tedious task. One never knows what the aftereffects might be. Even if there are several similarities between two particular views, it is not necessary that they both can be successfully merged.

The only way that a merger might take place is through considering the element possibility. It is this element of possibility that has the ability to write off rigid beliefs; beliefs that may hold true at one point in history, and be nullified later on. Such has been the case with systems of belief, and their examples stand as evidence of how a system of belief can be inverted.

Chardin’s aims at establishing a relationship between Christianity and Evolution, and may have well won over many readers’ hearts and minds through his insistence on searching for a logical relationship between the scientist and the believer (Christian). Chardin, in his work has done will to consider the possibilities of all that is known to humanity. He has considered the importance of both, science and religion, and aimed at establishing a logical relationship between the two. However, accepting his views is something that is up to the individual or all those who are strongly influenced by particular religious institutions. His views of the individual searching for the truth are perhaps some of the most interesting parts of his work. As an individual, one should search for the truth and be at peace with knowing what is right; one should be ready to accept the possibilities as well, as this would help one prepare for changes in the world as well. Aside from all his interesting views, it is this aspect that can awake one from his or her religious slumber or ignorance, and drive one towards understanding the vast possibilities regarding the relationship between evolution and religion (Christianity).