Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
A study of the Flood would there<strong>for</strong>e be incomplete without a reference to the moral depravity of that<br />
generation which was responsible <strong>for</strong> the destruction of the earth and without some application to the world<br />
of today. [1951:343]<br />
Rehwinkel followed this, his major work, with a couple of other creationist books:<br />
The Age of the Earth and Chronology of the Bible (1967), and The Wonders of Creation.<br />
(1974). The latter exposes evolution as “absurd, impossible, and unscientific.” “Genesis<br />
is the only possible source <strong>for</strong> knowledge concerning the origin of the universe [since]<br />
science is limited to the here and now...”<br />
Two other Missouri Synod Lutherans who actively supported creationism since<br />
the 1950s were John W. Klotz and Paul A. Zimmerman. Klotz received a Ph.D. in<br />
biology from the University of Pittsburgh and taught science at Concordia Senior College<br />
in Fort Wayne, Indiana. His 544-page biology textbook Genes, Genesis, and Evolution<br />
appeared in 1955 with a revised edition in 1970. A comprehensive treatment of biology<br />
(his training in biology is evident), especially genetics, the book includes biblical as well<br />
as scientific references. Klotz covers the evidences <strong>for</strong> evolution fairly thoroughly, but<br />
emphasizes the problems of evolution and clearly advocates creation. For instance, he<br />
has chapters or sections on the “species problem,” homology, vestigial organs,<br />
comparative physiology and biochemistry, embryology, mimicry, biogeography,<br />
paleontology, selection and isolation, genetics and mutation, human evolutio and alleged<br />
hominid ancestors, and various theories and proposed mechanisms <strong>for</strong> evolution. He<br />
includes many of the standard creation-science arguments.<br />
As Christians we know that in the Bible we do not have a theory which is subject to all sorts of changes, a<br />
theory which has come about as a result of the restricted reasoning abilities of human beings, but we have<br />
the inspired account of the only Being who was present at Creation...<br />
... Certainly evolution is by no means proved, and it is not the only explanation <strong>for</strong> the organic diversity<br />
that we find. It is not unreasonable, then, to assume that the changes which have occurred have been finite<br />
and limited and that they have occurred within closed systems, the “kinds” of creation. [1970:519-520]<br />
Klotz wrote several other creationist books, including one on the ecology crisis<br />
(1971). His most recent is Studies in Creation (1985), “A General Introduction to the<br />
Creation/Evolution Debate.” In this book, in addition to discussion of problems <strong>for</strong><br />
evolution, Klotz concedes and discusses “Problems <strong>for</strong> the Creationist”—areas of<br />
creation-science which he admits are vulnerable to criticism. These include<br />
biogeography, extinction theories (post-Flood extinctions), and continental drift. Klotz<br />
admits that the evidence of biogeography does appear to fit evolution theory better than<br />
creationism, but he adds that there are problems with evolutionist theory also, which he<br />
discusses in one long final chapter.<br />
While it is true that there are observations which fit better with the theory of evolution than they do with<br />
the theory of special creation, there are also areas...which fit better with the concept of special creation.<br />
One of these is the study of the evolution of man himself... Another...is the suggested mechanism <strong>for</strong><br />
evolution... Still another...is the whole question of the complexity of living things. [1985:143]<br />
Klotz, a young-earth creationist, admits that is possible to reconcile an ancient earth with<br />
creationism, but argues that if we accept the historicity of Creation and the Fall it makes<br />
no sense to wait so long <strong>for</strong> the Redeemer.