DOCSLIB.ORG

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 207 904 Parker, Franklin Why the Evolution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 207 904 Parker, Franklin Why the Evolution DOCUMENT RESUME ED 207 904 SO 013 631 AUTHOR Parker, Franklin TITLE Why the Evolution/Creation Battle Rages: What Educators Can Do. .PUB DATE 1 Oct 81 NOTE 66p.; Some pages may not reproduce clearly from EDRS in paper copy or microfiche due to variations in ink density. EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Biology; *Conflict; court Litigation; *Creationism; *Educational History; Educational Needs; *Evolution; History; Organizations (Groups) ABSTRACT The author explores the evolution/creation conflict and sug gests what educators might do to fulfill their responsibilities with the least offense to the religious beliefsof creationists an4 with respect for studentss right to understind their Western _scientific heritage. The paper begins with a history of the confict between creationists and those who believe in evolution. The author explores the movement of evangelical fundamentalistg who in the 1920s sought to dislodge evolution and in the 1980s seek equal time for creation science alongside evolution theorI: Going back before Darwin to the early church, this dispute is ldng rangeover the origin, nature, and future of man, and the universe. It has often been expressed in clashes between religion and science, fundamentalism and modernism, and now born again evangelism and secular humanism. Court cases are described. Creationist organizations and strategies are discussed.- Recolutions and policy statements of various.groupS are included and arguments for and against evolution, scientific .creation, and equal timeare presented. The last part of the paper talks about What educators cu do. School districts should anticipate and prepare early for problems likelyto arise. A "Procedures Committee's charged with dealing with conflict situations should_be organized. This_cOmmittee should assemble, maintain, and make available a library of information On evolution/treation'and gauge community feelings. Cleaf`procedures to reduce conflict, such as having complaints written,and signed, should be articulated. (Author /RN) ******************4************!**************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the oiiginal document. * *********************************************************4.************ - - U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION EOUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CEVTER (ERIC, ,Pr \iiThis document has been reproduced -as ..e received hom the person or organization ongmating it Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality ---- Points of view or opinions stated m this docu- ment do not necessarily represent off ecral-NIE position or policy 4N "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN NTED BY ,,, . ThrniCliriarke4, I e TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." R WHY THE EVOLUTION/CREATION BATTLE RAGES: WHAT EDUCATORS CAN DO By Franklin Parker IF October 1, 1981 ex e, Franklin Parker Bendum Professor of Education 14. 602 Allen Hall, Evansdale Campus West Viriginia University Morgantown, WV 26506 ; a Office: (304) 293-3441/2 Nome: (304) 599-1935 Cs ,c, 2, ti t..t , Franklin Parker October 1, 1981 Benedum Professor of Education 602 Allen Ha1,1, Evansdale Campus Office: (304) 293-3441/2 West Virginia University Home: (304) 599-1935 Morgantown, West Virginia26506 `Why the ¶volution /Creation Battle ,Rages: What Educators Can Do. By Franklin Parker TABLE OF CONTENTS Abbreviations Introduction BRIEF HISTORY OF THE EVOLUTION/CREATION CONFLICT Before Darwin Darwin American Reaction 1920 Scopes Trial, 1925 High School Biology Textbooks, 1920s-1963 Tennessee, 1967 Epperson v. Arkansas, 1968 CREATIONIST' ORIGINS, ORGANIZATIONS, AND STRATEGIES Modern Origins American Scientific Affiliation (ASA), 1914.1. Creation Research Society-(CRS)--,--1963 Creation Science Research Center (CSRC), 1970 Institute for Creation Research (ICR),,1972 Other Creationist Organizations Creationists' Characteristics EVENTS SINCE THE 1960S, California, 1962-72 Tennessee, 1973 West Virginia Textbook Case, 1974-75 MACOS, 1975 3 2 Segraves v. California, 1981 Arkansas, 1981 Louisiana, 1981 RESOLUTIONS AND POLICY STATEMENTS Science and Education _Associations State Departments of Education' ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST Evolution Scientific Creation .clual Time 01. WHY IS SECULAR HUMANISM THE ENEMY?' WHAT EDUCATORS CAN DO Anticipate and Prepare Early Legal Directives Collect Information Procedures Committee Committees of Correspondence Strengthening _Science_Teaching CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES t t 4 O lb 3 Abbreviations ABT American Biology Teacher (journal) ACLU American Civil Liberties Union ASA American Scientific Affiliation BSA Bible Science Association BSCS Biological Sciences Curriculum Study CRS .Creation Research Society CSRC Creation Science Reearch Center ICR Institute for Creation Research `"N. KKK Ku Klux Klan NACOS Man: A t,ourse of Study NABT .National Association of Biology Teachers NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NEA -Nat-i-onal-Educatiorr-Associati-On-- NSF , National Science Foundation. WCFA World's Christian Fundamentals Association 5 4 Introduction The formation in 198x0of the MoralsMajority with the Rev. JerryFalwell of Lypchburg, Va.,,as president marked the significant emergenceof the evangelical right anda renewal of fundamentalist religious thought inAmerica. Directly related were three legal events in1981 in which creationistsl-who believe in a literalGenesis account of the origin of man, theearth, and the universe--want creationtaught along with evolution in publicschools. On March 6 in Segravesv. California creationists gained nationalattention when a state SuperiorCourt judge' equired wider distributionof a 1973 Cali-44011' fornia Department ofEducation ruling that evolution is a theoryabout which scientists only hypothesize.Arkansas on March 23 and Louisianaon July 21 adopted laws requiringequal time for the teaching of "evolutiontheory" and "creation science." Similar bills being considered in 21 statesare based nn a model reportedly developed . by Institute for Creation 1 Research (ICR)lawyerWendell R. Bird and promoted nationally by SouthCarolinian Paul Ellwanger's.CitizensAgainst Federal Establishment of EvolutionaryDogma. The model equal timeevolution[ creation teachingbill carefully omits reference to religionand God in order to withstand 41 constitutional challengeof churdkand state separation. ICR wants. a similar bill introducedin the U.S. Congress to halt evolutionlectures in national parks andmuseums and to make "creation science" basedon Genesis .eligible for researchgrants. That the U.S. is inthe midst of a 'btrOng conservativeupsurge becameevi- .dent when conservatives in the1980 elections successfully targetedfor defeat --------- ----- liberal federal, state, and localoffice holders. Observers note that the evangelical right,achieving unusual : politi- 0 cal influence,encourages fellow creationists to dilodge evolutionand,. by implication7to weakenscience ih the public: schools and thusstrike at "secular 6 5 humanism" on which is blamed such evils as crime, drugs, abortion,women's rights, and homosexuality. 'khe author exploresthis sensitive, rising, and potentiallyexplosive move- ment of dedicated evangelical fundamental ts who in the 1920ssought to.dis- * lodge evolution and in the 1980sseek equal time for creation sciencealongside . evolution theory. Going back before g Darwin to the earlychurch, thisdispute is range one a lc over the origin,nature, and future of man and theuniverse. It has often beenexpressed in clashes between religion andscience, fundamentalism and modernism, andnow-born again evangeliim and secular humanism. Obviously a clear and fair accountwith objective attention to motivesand tactics is difficult to achieve in limited timeand space. The author, whohas learned much from research for thisvriting.experience, accepts responsibilityfor er- rors of fact and interpretation. He sincerely thahks those who helpedin any way. a This, then, is one educator-writer'sattempt to understand the evolution/t creation controversy and reasons whythe issue has become crucial inthe 1980s. He suggests what 'educators might do to fulfill their responsibilitieswith least offense to the religiousbeliefs of creation- ists and with respect for students' right to understandtheir Western scientificheritage. BRIEF HISTORY OF THE EVOLUTION/CREATIONCONFLICT Before Darwin Some people have, always preferredto believe that the world isstable and unchanging, others that humanlife eMerged from earlier livingthings which have continually changed. Early precursors of evolutionincluded Greek, philosopher Epicurus and Roman poet Lucretius. St. Augustineinterpreted 'Biblical creation as symbolic rather,than literal and thoUght thatorganisms . 7 o 6 created at the beginning may have evolved since. Carl Linnaeus, 18th century Swedish founder of systematic biology, classified thousands of animal and plant types, including apes, monkeys, andman, which he placed next to one another bet not as a consequence of common descent. Following Linnaeus' classi- fication of this great "chain of being," scholars who cautiouslysuggested evolution to explain the growth from simple to complex lifeforms included, among others, French philosopher Rene Descartes, French naturalist Count de Buffon, and English naturalist Erasmus Darwin, grandfather ofCharles Darwin. Darwin 4 'Young Charles Darwin (1809-82) spent fiveyearsas naturalist on H.M.S. Of Beagle (1831-30, British ship on a round-the-world sci.mtificexpedition,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals
    UNDERSTANDING THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: ITS TRUE NATURE AND GOALS A POSITION PAPER FROM THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY OFFICE OF PUBLIC POLICY AUTHOR: BARBARA FORREST, Ph.D. Reviewing Committee: Paul Kurtz, Ph.D.; Austin Dacey, Ph.D.; Stuart D. Jordan, Ph.D.; Ronald A. Lindsay, J. D., Ph.D.; John Shook, Ph.D.; Toni Van Pelt DATED: MAY 2007 ( AMENDED JULY 2007) Copyright © 2007 Center for Inquiry, Inc. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for noncommercial, educational purposes, provided that this notice appears on the reproduced materials, the full authoritative version is retained, and copies are not altered. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the Center for Inquiry, Inc. Table of Contents Section I. Introduction: What is at stake in the dispute over intelligent design?.................. 1 Section II. What is the intelligent design creationist movement? ........................................ 2 Section III. The historical and legal background of intelligent design creationism ................ 6 Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) ............................................................................ 6 McLean v. Arkansas (1982) .............................................................................. 6 Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) ............................................................................. 7 Section IV. The ID movement’s aims and strategy .............................................................. 9 The “Wedge Strategy” .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ron Numbers Collection-- the Creationists
    Register of the Ron Numbers Collection-- The Creationists Collection 178 Center for Adventist Research James White Library Andrews University Berrien Springs, Michigan 49104-1400 1992, revised 2007 Ron Numbers Collection--The Creationists (Collection 178) Scope and Content This collection contains the records used as resource material for the production of Dr. Numbers' book, The Creationists, published in 1992. This book documents the development of the creationist movement in the face of the growing tide of evolution. The bulk of the collection dates from the 20th century and covers most of the prominent, individual creationists and pro-creation groups of the late 19th and 20th century primarily in the United States, and secondarily, those in England, Australia, and Canada. Among the types of records included are photocopies of articles and other publications, theses, interview tapes and transcripts, and official publications of various denominations. One of the more valuable contributions of this collection is the large quantity of correspondence of prominent individuals. These records are all photocopies. A large section contains documentation related to Seventh-day Adventist creationists. Adventists were some of the leading figures in the creationist movement, and foremost among this group is George McCready Price. The Adventist Heritage Center holds a Price collection. The Numbers collection contributes additional correspondence and other documentation related to Price. Arrangement Ron Numbers organized this collection for the purpose of preparing his book manuscript, though the book itself is not organized in this way. Dr. Numbers suggested his original arrangement be retained. While the collection is arranged in its original order, the outline that follows may be of help to some researchers.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping the Creation-Evolution Debate in Public Life
    MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART (Under the Direction of Edward Panetta) ABSTRACT Evolution versus creation is a divisive issue as religion is pitted against science in public discourse. Despite mounting scientific evidence in favor of evolution and legal decisions against the teaching of creationism in public schools, the number of advocates who still argue for creationist teaching in the science curriculum of public schools remains quite large. Public debates have played a key role in the creationist movement, and this study examines public debates between creationists and evolutionists over thirty years to track trends and analyze differences in arguments and political style in an attempt to better understand why creationism remains salient with many in the American public. INDEX WORDS: Creation; Evolution; Public Debate; Argumentation; Political Style; Bill Nye MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART B.A., The University of Georgia, 2010 B.S.F.R., The University of Georgia, 2010 M.A.T., The University of Georgia, 2014 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of The University of Georgia in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS ATHENS, GEORGIA 2016 © 2016 Andrew Judson Hart All Rights Reserved MAPPING THE CREATION-EVOLUTION DEBATE IN PUBLIC LIFE by ANDREW JUDSON HART Major Professor: Edward Panetta Committee: Barbara Biesecker Thomas Lessl Electronic Version Approved: Suzanne Barbour Dean of the Graduate School The University of Georgia May 2016 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without Dr. Ed Panetta pushing me down the path to study the creation-evolution debates and his work with me on this through the many drafts and edits.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Princeton University Barbara Forrest Southeastern Louisiana University Steven G. Gey Florida State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Religion Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, and Steven G. Gey, Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1 (2005). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol83/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 83 NUMBER 1 2005 IS IT SCIENCE YET?: INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM AND THE CONSTITUTION MATTHEW J. BRAUER BARBARA FORREST STEVEN G. GEY* TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Price, George Mccready (1870–1963)
    Price, George McCready (1870–1963) JAMES L. HAYWARD James L. Hayward, Ph.D. (Washington State University), is a professor emeritus of biology at Andrews University where he taught for 30 years. He is widely published in literature dealing with ornithology, behavioral ecology, and paleontology, and has contributed numerous articles to Adventist publications. His book, The Creation-Evolution Controversy: An Annotated Bibliography (Scarecrow Press, 1998), won a Choice award from the American Library Association. He also edited Creation Reconsidered (Association of Adventist Forums, 2000). George Edward (McCready) Price was a Canadian writer and educator who served in a variety of capacities within the Seventh-day Adventist Church. During the early twentieth century he taught in several secondary schools and denominational colleges. His most enduring legacy, however, is his defense of Flood geology and creationism—he authored two dozen books and hundreds of articles on the topic. He often is credited with founding the modern creationist movement. Early Life and Education George Edward Price (later George McCready Price) was born on August 26, 1870, in Havelock, New Brunswick. His father, George Marshall Price, a nominal Anglican, had established a homestead, George McCready Price. Butternut Ridge, where he farmed newly cleared land. Photo courtesy of the General Conference of Seventh-day He and his first wife bore nine children. After she died, Adventists Archives. he married a tiny woman, Susan McCready, the mother of young George Edward and his younger brother, Charles Luther, born in 1872. The senior Price was not an overly religious man, but he enjoyed listening to Susan read from the Bible each morning.1 Susan McCready Price came from a literary family, including relatives who were newspaper editors in Saint John and Fredericton, New Brunswick.
    [Show full text]
  • Young-Earth Creationism, Creation Science, and the Evangelical Denial of Climate Change
    religions Article Revisiting the Scopes Trial: Young-Earth Creationism, Creation Science, and the Evangelical Denial of Climate Change K. L. Marshall New College, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH1 2LX, UK; [email protected] Abstract: In the century since the Scopes Trial, one of the most influential dogmas to shape American evangelicalism has been that of young-earth creationism. This article explains why, with its arm of “creation science,” young-earth creationism is a significant factor in evangelicals’ widespread denial of anthropogenic climate change. Young-earth creationism has become closely intertwined with doctrines such as the Bible’s divine authority and the Imago Dei, as well as with social issues such as abortion and euthanasia. Addressing this aspect of the environmental crisis among evangelicals will require a re-orientation of biblical authority so as to approach social issues through a hermeneutic that is able to acknowledge the reality and imminent threat of climate change. Citation: Marshall, K. L. 2021. Revisiting the Scopes Trial: Keywords: evangelicalism; creation science; young-earth creationism; climate change; Answers in Young-Earth Creationism, Creation Genesis; biblical literalism; biblical authority; Noahic flood; dispensational theology; fundamentalism Science, and the Evangelical Denial of Climate Change. Religions 12: 133. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12020133 1. Introduction Academic Editors: Randall Balmer The 1925 Scopes “Monkey” Trial is often referenced as a metonymy for American and Edward Blum Protestantism’s fundamentalist-modernist controversy that erupted in the years following World War I. William Jennings Bryan, the lawyer and politician who argued in favor of Received: 25 January 2021 biblical creationism1—in keeping with his literal understanding of the narratives in Genesis Accepted: 12 February 2021 Published: 20 February 2021 1 and Genesis 2—was vindicated when the judge ruled that high school biology teacher John Scopes had indeed broken the law by teaching Darwinian evolution in a public school.
    [Show full text]
  • The Creationist Movement: Science, Religion and Ideology
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 4-1983 The Creationist Movement: Science, Religion and Ideology George M. Bevins Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Bevins, George M., "The Creationist Movement: Science, Religion and Ideology" (1983). Master's Theses. 1559. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/1559 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: SCIENCE, RELIGION AND IDEOLOGY by George M. Bevins A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Sociology Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan April 1983 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. THE CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: SCIENCE, RELIGION AND IDEOLOGY George M. Bevins, M.A. Western Michigan University, 1983 A sample of literature produced by participants in the "creationist movement" is examined in an effort to delineate the ideology of the movement. This ideology is seen as a repertoire of images of science, evolution and society which is used by creationists in their efforts to propagate their movement. Based on this literature, an "ideological substructure of belief" within the creationist movement is described, consisting of their belief in a created normative order in the world and of their fear that this order is breaking down.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    Evo Edu Outreach (2009) 2:176–177 DOI 10.1007/s12052-009-0121-8 INTRODUCTION Introduction Donald Ross Prothero Published online: 21 March 2009 # Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2009 Overview and Whitcomb, Morris, Gish, and their ilk have advanced degrees in fields completely unrelated to paleontology. They The issue of evolution and creationism has a long history, may impress some of their audiences with the PhD after their but one of the central battles has long focused on the fossil names, but those of us within science recognize that the record of evolution. Even though Darwin (1859) had little advanced degree does not prove you are an expert in supporting evidence from the fossil record, by the late everything but only in the specialty in which you are trained. nineteenth century, examples such as Archaeopteryx and As I often point out to audiences, we would not trust these the evolution of horses had accumulated increasing support guys on their interpretations of music theory or auto for notion of evolution. In fact, the evidence of life’s mechanics (they are not trained in those fields either), so evolution as revealed in the fossil record was not disputed why should we listen to what they write about fossils? and seldom addressed by most creationists even into the Nevertheless, by boldly lying about and distorting the twentieth century (Numbers 1992). evidence of the fossil record, these impostors have managed This all changed with the more aggressive style of to convince a large percentage of the American population literalist “young-earth creationism” (Numbers 1992), pio- that the fossil record does not show evidence of evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Creationism
    The evolution of creationism David R. Montgomery, Quaternary Research Center and Dept. of (354–413), Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), and John Calvin (1509– Earth and Space Sciences, Box 351310, University of Washington, 1564) all endorsed reason as the way to learn about the world. Seattle, Washington 98195-1310, USA, [email protected] Augustine was among the first to caution against advocating for biblical interpretations that conflicted with what one could I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed observe for oneself. Centuries later, Aquinas praised the pursuit of us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their knowledge and insight gained from experience reading God’s use. —Galileo Galilei other book—nature. Writing at the time of the Reformation, Calvin, too, considered ABSTRACT the revelations of both nature and the Bible as fundamental truths. In his Institutes of the Christian Religion (1559), Calvin For centuries, natural philosophers, their scientific successors, explicitly embraced the idea of respecting natural truths revealed and theologians alike sought to explain the physical and natural through the study of nature: “If we regard the Spirit of God as the world. The now common cultural narrative of perpetual conflict sole fountain of truth, we shall neither reject the truth itself, nor between science and religion simplifies the arguments and despise it wherever it shall appear, unless we wish to dishonor the struggles of the past and overlooks cross-pollination between Spirit of God” (McNeill, ed., 1960, p. 273–274). those who embraced faith and reason as the keys to understanding Calvin believed in keeping an open mind when it came to earth history.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Creationism and Intelligent Design
    6 Scientifi c creationism and intelligent design Ronald L. Numbers For the past century and a half no issue has dominated discussions of science and religion more than evolution. Indeed, many people see the creation–evolution debates as the central issue in the continuing con- troversy. And for good reason. More than a century after the scientifi c community had embraced organic evolution, many laypersons con- tinued to scorn the notion of common descent. In the United States, where polls since the early 1980s have shown a steady 44–47 per cent of Americans subscribing to the statement that ‘God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so’, nearly two-thirds (65.5 per cent), including 63 per cent of college graduates, according to a 2005 Gallup poll, regarded cre- ationism as defi nitely or probably true. 1 As we shall see, such ideas have been spreading around the world. CREATION AND CREATIONISM In 1929 an obscure biology teacher at a small church college in north- ern California self-published a book entitled Back to Creationism . This brief work, appearing just as the American anti-evolution movement of the 1920s was winding down, attracted little attention. And it would deserve scant mention today except for the fact that it was one of the fi rst books to use the term ‘creationism’ in its title. Until well into the twentieth century critics of evolution tended to identify themselves as anti-evolutionists rather than creationists. 2 Three factors help to explain this practice.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bible and Creationism
    University of Dayton eCommons English Faculty Publications Department of English 2017 The iB ble and Creationism Susan L. Trollinger University of Dayton, [email protected] William Vance Trollinger University of Dayton, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://ecommons.udayton.edu/eng_fac_pub Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, and the Christianity Commons eCommons Citation Trollinger, Susan L. and Trollinger, William Vance, "The iB ble and Creationism" (2017). English Faculty Publications. 105. http://ecommons.udayton.edu/eng_fac_pub/105 This Book Chapter is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of English at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in English Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. 1 The Bible and Creationism Susan Trollinger and William Vance Trollinger, Jr. To understate the case, Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species (1859) marked a significant challenge to traditional understandings of the Bible and Christian theology. Darwin’s theory of organic evolution stood in sharp contrast with the Genesis account of creation, with its six days, separate creations of life forms, and special creation of human beings. More than this, Darwin’s ideas raised enormous theological questions about God’s role in creation (e.g., is there a role for God in organic evolution?) and about the nature of human beings (e.g., what does it mean to talk about original sin without a historic Adam and Eve?) Of course, what really made Darwin so challenging was that by the late nineteenth century his theory of organic evolution was the scientific consensus.
    [Show full text]
  • 26. More Geological Reasons Noah's Flood Did Not Happen
    Published bimonthly by the OF National Center for Science Education EPORTS THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIEncE EDUCATION REPORTS.NCSE.COM R ISSN 2159-9270 ARTICLE More Geological Reasons Noah’s Flood Did Not Happen Lorence G Collins and Barbara J Collins I NTRODUCTI ON Young-earth creationists believe that there was a worldwide flood covering the earth and that virtually all fossil-bearing sedimentary layers, up until the most recent, were deposited by that Flood in about one year (Genesis 7:11–24 to 8:1–13; Whitcomb and Morris 1961; Morris and Parker 1987). Although the time for deposition by a one-year flood of the nearly 3.75 kilometers of sedimentary rocks on top of the Precambrian strata (Figure 1) to the present seems impossibly short, Oard (2002) argues for Flood Geology nonetheless. His conclusions rest on the notion that the modern evidence cannot be used as a key to the past, as the uniformitarian principle is typically applied (Oard 2002). He writes uniformitarianism is a poor organizing principle and often invalid. For instance, sand- stones, which make up approximately 20% of the sedimentary rocks on the earth, are consistently different from modern sand deposits. As an example, pure quartzites (orthoquartzites) are common in the older record but none seem to be forming today. Quartzite is metamorphosed sandstone. (Oard 2002:8) Of course, even if uniformitarianism (as Oard [2002] has framed it) were completely false, it still would not make his alternative—a world-wide flood—true. He would need other evidence to support his model. So he goes on to say Furthermore, in the modern world sand generally accumulates in linear deposits while ancient sandstones form very large sheets: It is noteworthy that the most com- mon sites of sand accumulation in the modern world are linear (beaches and rivers); yet most sands of the past form extensive stratiform deposits (Pettijohn 1975).
    [Show full text]