Creationism - National Center for Science Education

e Divine Revelation, declares Galdstone. He also discusses recent discoveries of
Mesopotamian Creation and Flood stories, which, like Wiseman, he argues are flawed
derivatives of the original biblical versions.
David Holbrook emphasized the phenomenological nature of biblical language in
The Panorama of Creation as Presented in Genesis Considered in Relation with the
Autographic Record as Deciphered by Scientists (1908). The Genesis account, he argues,
pictorially portrays a panorama of creation in six divisions, like a series of paintings. The
first chapter is literature rather than science, he states, though he also insists that the Bible
harmonizes perfectly with science. Holbrook praises the Day-Age harmonizations of
Guyot and Dana, J.W. Dawson and Winchell. He also cites approvingly the Revelatory
and Literary theories of Miller and Gladstone, which seek to avoid the chronological
difficulties of strict Day-Age creationism. Holbrook wrote that his interpretation, which
combines the Revelatory and Framework theories, follows the views expressed by one
Willis J. Beecher.
Edward Young (1964:44-47) discusses the Framework theory advocated by Arie
Noordtzij of the University of Utrecht in his book God’s Word and the Testimony of the
Ages (1924, in Dutch). “That the six days do not have to do with the course of a natural
process may be seen, thinks Noordtzij, from the manner in which the writer groups his
material.” Such a recognition of the significance of the literary structure of Genesis
carries with it, of course, the danger of concluding that the Genesis account is purely
figurative or literary, and not a description of “real” events at all. Noordtzij was accused
of this, and the Framework Theory is very similar in important respects to non-creationist
analyses of Genesis as literature and myth.
PROGRESSIVE CREATIONISM
Another old-earth theory of creationism, which can border on or overlap with
non-creationist, evolutionist explanation is Progressive Creationism. Progressive
Creationism is more loosely defined than other types. More conservative forms of
Progressive Creationism may verge on Day-Age creationism, and more liberal
interpretations can become virtually identical with forms of theistic evolution. It involves
the belief that God intervened directly at various times over the ages, either creating new
species de novo or modifying existing ones. The number of these divine interventions
varies, according to interpretation, from six (as in standard Day-Age creationism) up to
almost constant supernatural supervision of phylogenetic progress.
Progressive Creationism has become more popular in recent decades amongst oldearthers
as the difficulties in reconciling the traditional Day-Age and Gap theories with
science have become more apparent. Bernard Ramm, a theology professor at American
Baptist Seminary of the West with a philosophy Ph.D from USC, is a leading exponent of
Progressive Creationism. His 1954 book The Christian View of Science and Scripture is
an excellent reference source for various interpretations regarding the relation of science
to the Bible, and discusses the various theories of creationism and their proponents.
Ramm urges a return to the tradition of late nineteenth-century conservative evangelical
scholars who diligently and carefully tried to harmonize science with scripture: he praises
J.W. Dawson, Pye Smith, Miller, Gray, Dana, Rendle-Short, Fleming, and Bettex in this
regard. Ramm laments the abandonment of science to materialists who ignore the Bible,