Creation Matters Vol. 3 No. 1 January/February 1998

8 Pages·0.49 MB·English

by  Creation Research Society

Volume 3, Number 1 January/February 1998
The Creation Story
History, Myth, Hymn or Saga?
by Aila Annala
Editor’s note: This article first appeared in
Some definitions of terms:
Genesis (Number 2, page 15, 1997), the maga-
history, myth, hymn, and saga
zine of the Swedish creation organization,
Foreningen GENESIS. This English translation
The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines
is reprinted here with permission.
history as a "continuous methodical record
V
ery few people, Christian as well of important or public events," and myth Announcing
as non-Christian, take the first as "traditional narrative usually involving
Physical Science and Creation
chapters in Genesis as a historical supernatural and fancied persons." Myth
description of real events in the beginning. may be based on history, while saga is a An Introduction
Most people have never reflected on the more fancied, often heroic narrative that by Don B. DeYoung, Ph.D.
I
creation story, and if someone asks them does not need to have any historical roots. n this small volume, Dr. DeYoung pre-
about it, many will just try to avoid the Yet, myth and saga are often used as sents several carefully chosen topics
question. The reason for this can be found synonyms. illustrating the integration of physical
in the strong influence of the mass media science and creation. Dr. DeYoung pres-
Hymn does not need to be defined —
upon the people, and in what they have ents not only the classical subject matter of
we all know what it means in our culture.
been taught in the public schools - very physical science (the building blocks of
But in the case of the creation story, it is
one-sided evolutionary ideas. nature, motion and forces, gravity, energy,
often used synonymously with myth; i.e.,
and light), but he also touches briefly on
It is a common opinion that the crea- as a poetic presentation of some kind of a
more modern topics such as radiometric
tion story of Genesis is a myth, a hymn, or creation process. This is why I have cho-
dating, quantum theory, the uncertainty
a saga, written down by primitive people a sen the order of the terms above. I am go-
principle, and relativity.
long time ago. Modern research, it is ing to discuss myth and hymn more or less
thought, has "proved" that their ideas are as one complex. Saga is, by definition, This book is the second in a series of
irrelevant for those of us who today "know something that I want to leave without any short, introductory texts published by the
better." Anyway, if we wish to argue for a further discussion. Creation Research Society. The first, As-
Creator's existence, then we should just tronomy and Creation — An Introduction,
The literary style
read into Scripture an evolutionary process was also written by Dr. DeYoung.
that took place during billions of years Anyone who reads the Genesis story in
80 pages. $4.95 plus $3 for postage and handling.
(theistic evolution). In this way we can Hebrew will find out quite soon that it is
read the creation story as a hymn to the one prose - a historical description of the be- Order from:
who led the evolutionary process. But, is ginnings. Something very typical for He- CRS Books
that really the way we ought to understand brew prose are the many waw-consecutive P.O. Box 8263
St. Joseph, MO 64508-8263
the creation story in the first chapters of forms in the beginning of the sentences
Genesis? (the repeated "ands" in the
beginning of the sentences
My purpose is to show that the crea- Contents:
in many English transla-
tion story can - and must - be taken as a The Creation Story: History, Myth, Hymn or Saga 1
tions). To make the crea-
historical description of the events in the 1998 ICC Registration Information 5
beginning, as it stands. Using a linguistic tion story into a hymn is as Crossword Puzzle: CRS Facts 6
difficult as trying to sing a Speaking of Science
approach, I am going to point out some
couple of pages from a The Firing Line Debate 7
details that give us evidence for a literal
modern history book. Creation Calendar 8
reading of the text.
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 1
Surely, there are hymns in the Bible What about all the other older myths, and the authors have collected
that are written in order to sing to the glory interpretations then...? information from sources outside the Bi-
of the Creator-God; poems, such as Ps. ble, such as the Babylonian creation story
104, where we find such expressions as Alternative (non-literal) interpretations Enuma Elish (about 900 B.C.), in which
"the foundations of the earth" (v. 5) and started to appear as late as the 17th and the god Marduk is struggling with the
"the rising of the sun" (v. 22). But let us 18th centuries, when rationalism and em- sea-goddess Tiamat about the lordship of
keep in mind that we still use this kind of piricism began to make an impact in the the universe.
intellectual world, but reached prominence
nonscientific language, sometimes even in Since Tiamat is quite close to the He-
by the end of the 18th century. Until that
very scientific contexts. Yes, there are po- brew tehom, "deep" in Gen. 1:2, some
time the Jewish-Christian tradition had
ems and hymns in the Bible that are written scholars believe that the Bible has bor-
continued to read the creation story liter-
in order to give the glory to the Creator, but rowed material from the Babylonians. Yet,
ally, with just a few exceptions.
the creation story does not belong to that the similarity is only linguistic, and there is
category. It is prose. Let us look at some of these excep- no reason to see any dependence between
There is no reason for taking the tions. There is a kind of gap theory (i.e., a the two stories. The Hebrew tehom, which
creation story as a myth or hymn, although gap of time is postulated, between the first we often translate "deep," means simply
there are many liberal theologians who try two verses in the creation story, wherein "wave," "a great quantity of water,"
to do so. There are many non-mythological the celestial bodies and the earth are "ocean," "sea," "gulf," "abyss." In other
elements; e.g., the sun and moon are not thought to have been created far earlier creation myths one can often read about a
called by their names, but are referred to than that which is presented in verse 2 and struggle between gods, but in the Genesis
only as lights. Other people by that time the remainder of the creation account). story there is no trace of anything one
worshiped them as gods. I believe that the This idea appears in some Jewish legends, would expect if Genesis were taken from
original writer of the creation story in the writings of Filon (a Jewish philoso- the Babylonian epic.
pher at the time of Christ who was influ-
(whether it was Adam or someone later)
It should be mentioned that the Gene-
enced by hellenistic philosophers), in the
wanted to make sure that these celestial
sis story has more similarities to older
aramaic Targum Onkelos (first century
bodies were regarded as just lights and not
creation myths from 3000-2000 B.C. (such
A.D.), and later on (11th and 12th centu-
gods.
as the Sumerian myths) than to these
ries) in the writings of the Jewish Rashi
The German theologian Gerhard von and Ibn-Ezra. The modern gap theory ap- younger myths. In the old myths the
Rad writes in his commentary on Genesis peared at the end of the 18th century. J.C. struggle motive is often missing. In one of
(s 47 f, 63) that Gen. 1-2 is a doctrine, not Rosenmuller and others were at that time the Egyptian myths (from ca. 2700 B.C.)
myth or saga. trying to make a synthesis between the we find the interesting similarity to the
biblical account that the creation was per-
"Nothing is here by chance; eve- creation story and the new geological hy-
formed by the spoken word, and that the
rything must be considered care- pothesis concerning the age of the earth.
creator god was "satisfied" with his work
fully, deliberately, and precisely. Soon the straightforward theistic evo- (about the same as "God saw that it was
It is false, therefore, to reckon lution became widely accepted among good" in Genesis).
here even occasionally with ar- theologians. It was thought that the evolu-
chaic and half-mythological ru- tionary process was God's method of The fact is that one can make many
diments, which one considers creation. Scientific speculations were fully comparisons between the biblical creation
venerable, to be sure, but theo- accepted, and the creation story of the Bi- story and other creation stories, and see
logically and conceptually less ble was to be understood in the light of both similarities and differences. All these
binding. What is said here is in- them. stories bear a witness of creation in the
tended to hold true entirely and beginning. Yet, the question remains:
exactly as it stands. There is no The authenticity of the which one of these stories is the original
trace of the hymnic element in the creation story one? All these stories come from the same
language, nor is anything said that In the theological world, the literary criti- geographical area. The fact that the uni-
needs to be understood symboli- cism and the historical method (which verse was created by a Creator-God seems
cally or whose deeper meaning holds that the Bible should be read as any to have been a common tradition, and then
has to be deciphered." other literature) were formulated to fit later on somebody wrote it down. So we
got different accounts. Only the biblical
scientific theories. Until that time the most
von Rad also warns modern Bible story is free from mythological elements
prominent theologians, the church fathers,
students against reading their own prob- that are so common in the other stories.
the reformers, etc., had believed that the
lems concerning faith and knowledge into Our conclusion should be that the creation
Genesis story should be understood mainly
the text. These words come from one of the story in Genesis is the authentic, trust-
in the literal sense.
most respected Old Testament scholars of worthy account of the beginnings.
our time. According to him, from a her- The literary criticism and the histori-
Here we also have to note the tradi-
meneutical point of view, the creation cal method have, during the past two cen-
tional Christian view on inspiration of the
story is a doctrine. turies, presented ideas that the creation
Bible. If we believe that God himself in-
story of Genesis is derived from other,
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 2
spired all that the biblical writers tell us, already given that order in the first chapter. were the heavens made... For he spoke,
then we cannot think that he would have and it came to be; he commanded, and it
The use of tenses in the modern
given us some half-truths and false infor- stood firm." (Ps. 33:6,9 NIV)
translations may sometimes give a wrong
mation, whether the question is about the
picture of the chronological order in the Everything was created instantane-
beginnings or anything else.
original Hebrew. In the Hebrew text it is ously by the word of the Creator. No
The unity of the story not possible to distinguish between the evolutionary processes are possible. How
past tenses (did, have/had done). For in- long ago the creation happened, I am not
The literary critics have tried to see two
stance, Gen. 2:19: "Now the Lord going to discuss here, since the Genesis
different stories in Gen. chapters 1 and 2,
formed/had formed..." In the light of the story itself does not give us that informa-
the first occurring in Gen. 1:1-2:4a, and the
chronology of chapter 1, "had formed" is tion. The Bible does not give any evidence
second from Gen. 2:4b onwards. This
of course to be preferred. for millions or billions of years. The evi-
reasoning is due to differences in the lit-
dence is quite impressive that the creation
erary style, in the chronological order, and In chapter 2 the writer simply goes
is fairly young.
in the use of God's name, Jehovah, in the back to some details that he wants to bring
"second" story. What can be said about up again, and I cannot see why we should Mature creation out of nothing has as
this? not allow him to do so without questioning its natural consequence an apparent age. If
the chronology. It has also sometimes been you accept that the biblical story describes
There is no reason to try to split up the
pointed out that in chapter 1 the light was a mature creation, then you have to reckon
creation account. The Hebrew text is one
created before the light sources, the celes- an apparent age. Compare, for example,
unit. The reason for the differences in style
tial bodies. This is something that we Jesus’ changing of water into wine, which
and vocabulary can be as simple as that the
was "good" (i.e., it was old).
writer just changed them depending
on what he was writing about. Any A whole universe in six literal The Hebrew verb for create, bara,
writer has the right to do so. can only have God as its subject. Only
days? Is it possible? Or, is it pos-
God can create; i.e., command things
The differences may also be ex- sible that the days represent
and beings into existence. Bara, create,
plained by the fact that the "second"
longer periods of time? is an absolutely unique verb, with an
story is complementary to the "first"
absolutely unique subject, God, the
one, which is a chronological presen-
Creator of the heavens and the earth
tation of the acts of the creation. In the modern people find hard to understand.
and everything.
"second" story the writer concentrates on But for the ancients, it was natural to think
the creation of man. That is why the use of of light as a substance in itself, not de- Were the days really days?
the personal name of God, Jehovah Elohim pendent upon material sources; the light
A whole universe in six literal days? Is it
(Lord God, instead of just Elohim, God) is was something divine (which explains
possible? Or, is it possible that the days
natural here — it was the name which God why the heavenly bodies were often wor-
represent longer periods of time?
later used to present himself to mankind. shiped as gods). In the Genesis story the
celestial bodies were just given the task to The Hebrew word for day, yom, is
In the "first" story, vegetation was
mediate the light that already existed; their used both literally and symbolically in the
created on the third day and man on the
purpose was to be "lights in the expanse of Bible. In Gen. 1-2 we have to understand
sixth, while in the "second" story it seems
the sky to separate the day from the yom as literal, 24-hour days, for the fol-
that man already existed when God created
night..., to serve as signs to mark seasons lowing reasons:
vegetation. But according to Gen. 2:5,
there was no vegetation because there was and days and years... and... be lights in the 1. The creation days are de-
no water for its growth. Yet, verse 6 tells of expanse of the sky to give light on the limited by the evening and morn-
water coming from the earth to water the earth" (Gen. 1:14,15 NIV). ing, both of which always mean
ground, which may imply that there was Creation of the universe, out literal evening and morning.
some vegetation growing on the earth. of nothing
2. The first day, yom ehad,
Verse 7 tells about the creation of man.
"In the beginning God created the heavens is, in fact, not called the first day
And then God planted a garden, verse 8,
and the earth" could also be translated: "In in the Hebrew text, but "day one"
using the plants that he already had cre-
the beginning God created everything." or "one day." We could talk about
ated.
The Hebrews usually expressed totality by a "proto-day," a day that was to
Another example of the supposed naming the opposites, in this case heaven be the measure of all the coming
chronological problems in chapter 2 is that and earth. This becomes very clear in the days. It was not possible to use
man seems to have been created before Sabbath commandment in Ex. 20:11 the order "first" yet, since there
animals. We have already seen that chapter (NIV): "For in six days the Lord made the had not been any day before. It
2 concentrates on man, and I believe that heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that was not until after this "proto-
we have to allow the writer to go back to is in them..." Everything was created dur- day" that one could start talking
some details in his story, without repeating ing the creation week, out of nothing, by about the second day, third day,
the chronological order any more. He has the word of God. "By the word of the Lord and so on.
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 3
3. Together with an attribute "Fear God and give him glory, because the trustworthy account of how the universe
expressing order (e.g., the second, hour of his judgment has come. Worship came to be. There are neither theological
the third, etc.), yom is only used him who made the heavens, the earth, the nor scientific reasons that can force us to
literally. sea and the springs of water." (NIV) The take the Genesis story as archaic and un-
latter part of this quotation is a short form trustworthy.
4. If the days were intended
of the Sabbath commandment in Exodus
The creation story is the foundation of
to represent longer periods of
20:11 and shows the writer's belief in the
the rest of the Bible. Human history began
time, then why did the writer not
6-day creation.
with the completed creation. Then sin
use the word dor, which means a
The New Testament, and the Bible as came into God's good creation and de-
period of time and can be used in
a whole, make it clear, time and time again, stroyed it. But God did not leave man alone
different contexts, instead of
that God is the Creator of everything, and in his sinful condition. His plan for fallen
yom?
that he did it in six days, as it says in the man is salvation through Jesus Christ. Be-
Our conclusion must be that there is first chapters in Genesis. Nowhere can we cause of Calvary and the empty tomb man-
nothing, either in the Genesis story or in find any evidence for any other under- kind can look forward to the new creation.
other biblical texts, that gives evidence for standing of the creation story than what it Then we are going to see with our own eyes
any understanding of the creation days really says, a mature creation in six literal how God makes everything new (Rev.
other than that of literal, 24-hour days. days. 21:1-5), a new creation, out of nothing, as
the prophet Isaiah describes it (65:17,
Another interesting question is of Conclusion
NIV): "Behold, I will create [bara in the
course: from where did the 7-day week
We have seen that the creation story in Hebrew text again] new heavens and a new
come? Mankind has in all times and all
Genesis 1 and 2 became widely questioned earth. The former things will not be re-
cultures had some kind of week. The time
first in the late 18th century, as a result of membered, nor will they come to mind."
period of the week does not depend on the
the development of the natural sciences
heavenly bodies or other natural phenom- Literature
and the skeptical rationalism. By that time
ena as do other times periods (days,
theologians began to read mythological Eriksson, Gösta, "Urhistoriens struktur", Genesis no.
months, years). Why? From where does the
elements into the biblical text and take the 1, 1991
week come if not from the original creation Erlandsson, Seth, Världshistoriens första dagar (Bib-
creation story as a kind of praise, a hymn to
week of Genesis? licums småskrifter) no. 12, 1983
the Creator, or as a saga. Today most peo-
Fields, Weston W., Unformed and Unfilled, Presby-
The New Testament and the ple in Europe have been taught this kind of terian and Reformed Publ. Co., 1978
Genesis story thinking. Kaiser, Christopher, Creation and the History of Sci-
ence, Marshall Pickering, W. B. Eerdmans
Jesus, while talking about marriage We have seen that there is no reason to Publ. Co., 1991
and divorce, says: "Haven't you read... that question the creation story in Genesis. It Morris, Henry M., The Genesis Record, Baker Book
at the beginning the Creator made them stands there as a true history of the begin- House, 1976
male and female...?" (Matt. 19:4, NIV) nings. It is not to be interpreted but to be Pritchard, James B., The Ancient Near East, vol. 1,
An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, Princeton
Then he quotes Gen. 1:27 and 2:24. "The read and believed as it stands.
University Press, 1973
beginning" refers, of course, back to the von Rad, Gerhard, Genesis (The Old Testament Li-
The Hebrew text is prose, and neither
creation week; the Bible does not know brary) SCM Press Ltd., 1972
the story itself nor other Bible texts leave
any other beginning. Jesus fully believed in
room for any understandings other than Aila Annala has studied at Newbold Col-
the creation account of Genesis.
what it says. The story is one unit, a de- lege in England and at the Universities of
Uppsala and Lund in Sweden. She has the
The writer of the letter to the Hebrews scription of God's creative acts. The literal Swedish "theol. Kand." degree from Upp-
(1:10, NIV) quotes the book of Psalms: "In creation week with its literal 24-hour days, sala (which is similar to M. Div.), with
additional studies in Semitic languages
the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foun- the creation out of nothing, and many other from Lund. She lives in Sweden, working
dations of the earth, and the heavens are the details give strong evidence that the story in team-ministry with her husband, and is
an active member of the Swedish creation
work of your hands." This shows that he of Genesis provides a unique insight into society "Genesis." Aila provided this
also believed in the Genesis account. something that is possible only for an al- English translation.
mighty God.
Paul and Barnabas express their faith
in God as the Creator of everything (Acts There are many other creation stories
14:15, NIV): "Men, why are you doing all all around the world, with similarities to
this? We, too, are only men, human like and differences from the Biblical story, and
you. We are bringing you good news, they all bear witness to a Creator-God.
telling you to turn from these worthless Many of these stories have been corrupted
things to the living God, who made heaven during the millennia, but they do have a
and earth and sea and everything in them." common source, mankind’s collective
memories of the creation of the universe.
Revelation 14 describes three angels,
My conviction is that the creation story of
warning of the coming judgment, and in
Genesis is the original, historical, and
verse 7 we read the following message:
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 4
This page intentionally left blank.
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 5
Down
1. Space agency.
2. Founder and board member who is
known as the world's foremost creation de-
bater.
4. "By the Word ___ the Lord were the
heavens made."
5. Bob _________ Wilderness, site of
many CRS extended trail rides.
6. ________ Creek Canyon Gorge, PA.
Location of a Society field research study.
7. Board member who is a retired chem-
ist and university teacher.
8. _______ Canyon, subject of a Dec.,
1997 Quarterly paper.
10. On day _____ the stars were created.
12. ______ Zone. Geological province
where Research Center is located.
13. Creation ________ Expeditions.
Name for CRS extended outings.
15. Who God created in His own image.
16. Board member who is a Lutheran Pas-
tor and geologist.
17. A radiation particle that is an electron.
19. Name of current Research Center di-
rector.
22. A patron of the Research Center.
23. E-mail address for Research Center
Director.
26. Name of the book that sparked the
modern creationist movement.
28. First CRS president who was the
world's foremost rose breeder.
30. Geological events happening "fast
and furiously."
32. “______ Organs.” Partial name of
book published by the Society.
Across 33. Biblical barge builder.
40. New research building at the Re-
35. Location of Big Bend National Park,
search Center.
where many creationary research projects
3. Board member who is an animal nutri- 41. Town nearest Research Center. have been carried out.
tionist and CRS membership secretary. 44. "He spoke and it was _____." 37. First woman.
9. A son of Noah. 46. 199_, Society's 35th anniversary. 38. "________ recapitulates phylogeny,”
10. Board member, internationally recog- 47. __________ formation. A research a thoroughly discredited idea which is still
nized expert on turtles. project under development at the Re- presented in many biology textbooks.
11. Name of state in which CRS Re- search Center. 39. Botanist board member who has pub-
search Center is located. 51. Site of annual board meetings for lished in Calif. Academy of Sciences.
13. Unexpected earth upheaval. nearly 30 years. 42. A vein of metallic ore.
14. Board member who wrote "Starlight 52. "All things continue as they were from 43. Current (1998) president of CRS.
and Time." the beginning." 45. Physicistl/Astronomer board member.
18. Ps. 23:5 bench. 54. Matt. 22:29 "Ye do ______ not know- 47. The whole is greater than the sum of
20. "In the _________." ing the Scriptures." its parts.
21. "______ to the Earth," a book of geol- 55. A founder of CRS who also co- 48. High-tech site of many discussions
ogy reprints from the Quarterly. authored "The Genesis Flood." sponsored by CRS.
23. Current (1998) editor of Society's 56. Deceased board member who was 49. Board member who is an exercise
Quarterly. Dean of Graduate Faculty at Tulane Univ. physiologist.
24. Pertaining to the moon. 57. _________ Mountain. Mountain east 50. More than _____ hundred scientists
25. Board member whose specialty is ge- of the Research Center. are members of CRS.
netics. 58. _________ grassland. Ecological 53. Abbreviation of Society peer-reviewed
27. Deceased Board member who was community in which the Research Center publication.
author of "Genes, Genesis and Evolution." is found. 55. To create.
29. _________ Peaks are visible to the 59. Board member who was also Dean of 56. Ps. 33.12. "Blessed is the man whose
N.E. of the Research Center. the College of Engineering at Iowa State God is the ____."
31. Geological feature 100 miles north of University.
the Research Center.
33. Abbreviation for an anti-creationist C R S Facts
group.
34. Board member who is a geographer. by John Meyer, Ph.D.
36. Type of astronomical object being Answers on page 8.
studied at the Research Center.
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 6
Speaking of Science
Commentaries on recent news from science...
Darwinian theory is convincing and is the only Behe's basic point was that life provides
The Firing Line Debate
possible explanation for natural history. evidence of design, but I don't think he effec-
by Ashby L. Camp, J.D., M.Div. tively pressed that home to those who insisted a
The only one from the pro-design side
designer was unnecessary. Rather, his point was
(Buckley, Johnson, Behe, and Berlinski) who
As I feared, the debate (see sidebar) suf- really contested the viability of the Darwinian muffled by the reply that the designer could have
fered greatly from the vagueness of the explanation was Berlinski. He argued that the accomplished his design through descent with
proposition under consideration: Evolu- gaps in the fossil record were inconsistent with modification. Behe would agree with that, be-
tionists should acknowledge creation. The two the theory. I think he was a bit shocked at the cause he is unwilling in the scientific arena to
sides were, for the most part, addressing sepa- level of the debate. He seemed to me to be ex- argue anything about the designer or his meth-
rate issues. pecting a more dispassionate, truth-seeking ex- ods, but he would not agree with Scott, Ruse,
and Miller that his examples of design can be
The pro-evolution side (Lynn, Scott, change and was surprised by the level of
explained by a blind, undirected process. Behe
Miller, and Ruse) addressed whether the theory gamesmanship and advocacy. He could not get a
was nervous (which is understandable) and
of descent with modification from a common straight answer to the simplest of questions (e.g.,
definitely got taken off his game.
ancestor is a convincing explanation for the what is your estimate of how many morphologi-
history of life on Earth. They were not interested cal changes would be needed to convert a dog- In that regard, Miller came off to me as a
in debating whether God was involved in that like mammal into a whale?) and could not get condescending showman, but I can see why the
process or was a necessary ingredient in the agreement on seemingly obvious facts (e.g., a evolutionists saw him as their hero. He, obvi-
explanation. Indeed, there was an apparent dif- discontinuous fossil record is inconsistent with ously skilled in the tactics of this kind of debate
ference of opinion between them on that point. the predictions of Darwinism). format, was able to create an impression that he
had really shown something. His ploy with the
Barry Lynn clearly believed that God em- I was disappointed that Berlinski conceded
mousetrap was shameless. Not only did it not
ployed descent with modification and, more the late-reptile to mammal transition. I realize
disprove the irreducible complexity of a mouse-
specifically, that He employed Darwinism as this is conventional wisdom in the scientific
trap, since the trap still had all the necessary
His means of creating. However, Lynn was community, but it is far from proven. Johnson's
functions. But even if he had been successful,
vague about just how deeply God was involved point that the alleged transitional forms are
the mousetrap is simply an illustration of a
in the process. I wish someone had clearly found where the fossil evidence is slightest, and
concept that cannot be denied; i.e., that some
pinned him down on whether he believed the thus where room for evolutionist interpretation
systems cannot be reduced in complexity and
Darwinian explanation of existence required is greatest, was probably lost.
still function. This was nothing but smoke
God in order to be viable.
blown grandiosely to divert the layman from the
The Debaters
Eugenie Scott wanted to separate the thesis power of Behe's point. (This is the same Miller
of descent with modification from the Darwin- On December 19, 1997, a two-hour debate on the who has shown himself to be careless or un-
ian explanation. Of course, she had no other creation evolution controversy was conducted on scrupulous in several dealings with Dr. Gish.
theory to put in its place, but she was trying to PBS' Firing Line. The special event was held before See, Duane Gish, Creation Scientists Answer
say that "evolution" simply means descent with a student audience at Seton Hall University. Arguing Their Critics [El Cajon, CA: Institute for Crea-
for the creationists and for the proposition were:
modification, and that Darwinian theory is but tion Research, 1995], pp. 88-94).
one possible explanation of "evolution" (albeit William F. Buckley, Jr., the host of Firing
Johnson's (and Buckley's) basic point was
the only game in town at this point). She agreed Line
the philosophical side of Behe's coin, namely
that science proper could make no statement Phillip E. Johnson, University of Califor- that naturalism is a philosophical rather than a
about whether an intelligence was somehow nia (Berkeley) law professor and author of scientific conviction. In other words, science
involved in the process, but her personal view 'Darwin on Trial,' 'Reason in the Balance,' proper has no basis for ruling out the possibility
was that an intelligence was not necessary to and 'Defeating Darwinism by Opening of a designer. This is important, but it loses its
the explanation. In other words, she thinks eve- Minds' edge in a debate where the opposing team (Lynn
rything can be explained naturally, but she is Michael Behe, Lehigh University bio- and Scott) concedes the matter and then pro-
willing to admit that science cannot prove the chemist and author of 'Darwin's Black Box' ceeds to argue that all of life evolved from a
common ancestor. In that case, the focus needs
noninvolvement of a designer. David Berlinski, mathematician, author
to shift to the merits of that claim.
I wish someone had clearly exposed that of ‘The Deniable Darwin’
What we really had here was a confusing
she believed existence can be adequately ex- Arguing for the evolutionists and opposing the
and unsatisfying mixture of at least two separate
plained in terms of purely natural processes and resolution were:
debates: (1) "Can our existence be adequately
then pressed her to provide naturalistic expla- Eugenie C. Scott, Executive Director of explained by purely natural processes (i.e.,
nations for the clear features of design. I think the National Center for Science Education without the input of a designer)?" and (2) "Did
the weakness of her practical naturalism would all living things descend naturally from a single
Rev. Barry Lynn, Executive Director of
thereby have been exposed (but I realize this common ancestor?" This muddle made the de-
Americans United for Separation of
format was not really a good one for pinning Church and State bate very difficult to score. Of course, they all
someone down). either mocked or ran from the third issue;
Michael Ruse, philosopher and author of namely "Is the biblical account of creation
Kenneth Miller and Michael Ruse did not 'But Is It Science?' and 'Monad to Man' compatible with scientific data?" That was dis-
let on if they felt there was any room for the Kenneth R. Miller, Div. of Biology and couraging, but I still think the airing of the de-
involvement of an intelligence (unless one Medicine, Brown University bate will be a net positive. I suspect the lasting
counts Miller's comment that he shares a faith effect will be to help legitimize the questioning
— Editor
with Buckley). Their whole point was that the of the reigning dogma.
January/February 1998 A Newsletter of the Creation Research Society 7
Note: Items in “Creation Calendar” are for information only; the listing of an event does not necessarily imply endorsement by the Creation Research Society.
March 21 August 3-8
Kansas City Fossil Hunt #1 Developing & Systematizing the Creation Model of Origins
CSA for Mid-America (Kansas City area) 1998 International Conference on Creationism (ICC)
Tom Willis, [phone] Geneva College, Beaver Falls, PA
March 28 Creation Science Fellowship
Double-Header Creation Event with Dr. Gary Parker & Buddy Davis Dennis Wert, [phone]
Souther Minn. Assoc. For Creation, Albert Lea, MN August 9-11
Bryce Gaudian, [phone] Niagara Falls Bus Tour (following the 1998 ICC)
April 24-26 Creation Quest Expeditions, Creation Research Society
Ha Ha Tonka Safari John Meyer, [phone]
“More of God’s Wonders in less space than anywhere else” August 9-14 or 16-21
CSA for Mid-America (Kansas City area) Red Cloud Family Mountain Adventure
Tom Willis, [phone] Alpha Omega Institute, Grand Junction, CO
May 21-23 [phone]
Creation Research Society August 20-26
Annual Meeting of the Board of Directors Bob Marshall Wilderness Trail Ride (Montana)
San Diego, CA Creation Quest Expeditions, Creation Research Society
Any member wishing to appear before the Board must make a John Meyer, [phone]
written request to the Secretary at least one month in advance, September 28 - October 3
indicating the subject the member wishes to discuss. San Juan Mountains Trail Ride (Colorado)
June 28-July 3 Creation Quest Expeditions, Creation Research Society
Twin Peaks Family Science Adventure John Meyer, [phone]
Alpha Omega Institute, Grand Junction, CO
[phone]
Creation Matters
ISSN 1094-6632
A publication of the Creation Research Society
Volume 3, Number 1
January/February 1998
Copyright © 1998, Creation Research Society
All rights reserved.
General Editor: Glen Wolfrom
Email: [email protected]
Assistant Editor: Lane Lester
Email: [email protected]
For membership / subscription information, advertising rates,
and information for authors:
Glen Wolfrom
P.O. Box 8263
St. Joseph, MO 64508-8263
Email: [email protected]
Creation Research Society Website:
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/crs/crs-home.html
Creation Research Society
Nonprofit Org.
P.O. Box 8263
US Postage
St. Joseph, MO 64508-8263
PAID
USA
Creation Research Society
Return Service Requested
Creation Matters
January / February 1998