Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Creationism - National Center for Science Education Creationism - National Center for Science Education
Rev. Zimmerman, a chemist and a theologian, was president of Concordia Lutheran College in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He edited a 1959 book Darwin, Evolution, and Creation. The four authors included Klotz, Wilbert Rusch (described later in the Creation Research Society section), Zimmerman himself, and a theology professor at Concordia Teachers College in Nebraska. The authors acknowledge some limited evolution as opposed to fixity of species. But there is much in evolutionary theory, in its accompanying philosophy, and in its denial of creation that we must reject and oppose. We hold that Christians must not confuse scientific fact, theory, and just plain scientific speculation. [1959:x] God reveals Himself in both nature and the Bible. “Neither form of revelation can possibly contradict the other.” Scientific truth, however, is relative and changing; the Bible’s truth is absolute (though it may be misinterpreted). Zimmerman edited a 1966 volume called Essays from the Creationist Viewpoint; the later, better known edition (1972) is titled Creation, Evolution, and God’s Word. Authors are Klotz, Zimmerman, Rusch, Walter Lammerts (described later in the Creation Research Society section), and Richard Korthals, a former astronautics professor at the Air Force Academy, then teaching physics at Concordia Junior College in Ann Arbor. Zimmerman also wrote other creationist pamphlets, which insisted both on biblical inerrancy as well as that scientific evidence supported creationism. In one, We Are the Offspring of God (nd), he admits that he opposes evolution primarily for biblical and philosophical reasons rather than scientific ones: “It is indeed in the basic philosophy of evolution that we find the greatest objection to evolution.” Evolution claims that man has “risen from the swamp” and needs no Savior. This is bad science, says Zimmerman; but more importantly, it contradicts the Bible. EARLY CREATIONIST ORGANIZATIONS Although Rimmer was the only member of his Research Science Bureau, and wrote all the pamphlets and books that it published, the Bureau apparently did hold public meetings. The Religion and Science Association was organized in 1935 by Dudley Whitney, assisted by George McCready Price and Byron Nelson. According to its constitution, its members “assert their disagreement with the principle of evolution,” which is based on the assumption that nature be interpreted solely in terms of natural processes. Members affirm that God “is not hampered by any so-called ‘laws’ of nature,” and that they believe the biblical account of definite acts of fiat creation by God (quoted in Morris 1984:112). Morris, in his History of Modern Creationism, laments the fact L. Allen Higley was recruited to be the Association’s first president. Higley was not a strict young-earth Flood Geology creationist like the others; he believed in Gap Theory creationism. Morris suggests that Higley was chosen because he had a legitimate science Ph.D. (they did not), and occupied a prestigious position as professor of chemistry and geology at Wheaton College in Illinois, a prominent Christian school. Higley cannot be accused of being soft on evolution. He describes the purpose of his 1940 book as “to disprove evolution and many other false speculations which dishonor the Creator...” (1940:6).
Evolution is purely speculation. It is pseudo-science, because it is directly opposed to the clearly observed facts and definitely established laws of science as well as directly opposed to the definite statements of the Bible. [1940:60] Any theory which contradicts the Bible is “necessarily false.” “The Bible is the one foundation on which all true science must finally rest, because it is the one book of ultimate origins” (1940:10). Facts of science must be biblically standardized, says Higley, then classified, so that ultimate truth can be distinguished from passing speculation. But Higley also refuted Flood Geology. Young-earth creationists, he argues, though they claim to be catastrophists in opposition to uniformitarian evolution, fail to realize that there was an even greater cataclysm before the Flood: the pre-Adamic destruction of the world of the Gap Theory. The Religion and Science Association lasted only a couple of years. Morris attributes its demise to increasing numbers of old-earth creationists—especially from Wheaton—and the inevitable compromises that (according to Morris) this entails. Other active members included Harold Clark, Theodore Graebner, Leander Keyser, and Clarence Benson. Theodore Graebner was a professor of philosophy and the New Testament at Concordia Theological Seminary in St. Louis (Missouri Synod Lutheran). In Evolution: An Investigation and a Criticism (1921), he vigorously denounced evolution as anti- Christian and unscientific. He admits his argument is “derived from the study of religion,” but he also employs many scientific quotes. “Christianity is justified even by reason,” wrote Graebner (1921:28), whereas “the evolutionary hypothesis is contradicted by the facts of religion, of history, and of natural science.” Evolution exludes divine fiat and revelation, supernaturalism, the immortality of the soul, and any absolute standard of morals; therefore it is false. In Essays on Evolution (1925), Graebner refuted the arguments of the various scientific witnesses at the just-completed Scopes Trial. “Never has the hollowness of evolutionistic claims become so apparent,” he wrote, as in the statements of these scientists. (The scientific witnesses were not allowed to testify orally at the trial, but their statements were included in the trial record for use in an expected appeal.) Graebner denounced H.G. Wells’ 1921 Outline of History as evolutionist propaganda (it does strongly advocate evolution); also a 1916 National Geographic article by Theodore Roosevelt on prehistoric man (itself based on H.F. Osborn’s Men of the Old Stone Age), and many other works. He includes a letter Roosevelt wrote in response to Graebner’s complaints. Graebner cites a pictograph from Hava Supai Canyon in Arizona which is allegedly a drawing of a dinosaur, claiming that this destroys the evolutionary time-scale. This drawing, and others similarly interpreted, have become widely-used creationist evidence. Baker and Nichol (1926) discussed it, and it is exactly this kind of evidence which is touted in modern creationist presentations such as the 1979 Films for Christ movie The Great Dinosaur Mystery and Paul Taylor’s accompanying book (1987). God and the Cosmos: A Critical Analysis of Atheism, Materialism and Evolution (1943; originally 1932), Graebner’s major work, is larger an expansion of the same arguments. It is filled with quotes from anti-Darwinist and anti-evolutionist scientists, and Bible-believing scientists and writers. Graebner also recites the standard creation-
- Page 9 and 10: PRE-MILLENNIALISM CHAPTER 1 FUNDAME
- Page 11 and 12: Jackson is a Church of Christ minis
- Page 13 and 14: Scottish professors. Rejecting the
- Page 15 and 16: Bacon’s scientific method “to r
- Page 17 and 18: Randall Hedtke, in his 1983 book Th
- Page 19 and 20: Price wrote that he always tried
- Page 21 and 22: Morris, like most creation-scientis
- Page 23 and 24: Was there any way by which all desi
- Page 25 and 26: example), but these changes are all
- Page 27 and 28: stating the fact that at this parti
- Page 29 and 30: all coming to pass, calculated by m
- Page 31 and 32: course insist on a literal interpre
- Page 33 and 34: adhering to true biblical principle
- Page 35 and 36: similar to Orr’s. He tried to all
- Page 37 and 38: In the final chapter of God—or Go
- Page 39 and 40: the students. That is probably the
- Page 41 and 42: Therefore it becomes painfully nece
- Page 43 and 44: CHAPTER 2 ORIGINS OF MODERN “SCIE
- Page 45 and 46: Creation by demonstrating the falsi
- Page 47 and 48: nurture their young, and sent them
- Page 49 and 50: explanation of these wonders.” Th
- Page 51 and 52: We feel the public are being deceiv
- Page 53 and 54: Genesis should be kept out of publi
- Page 55 and 56: “ontogeny repeats phylogeny”—
- Page 57 and 58: scientist is the authority of the f
- Page 59: A study of the Flood would therefor
- Page 63 and 64: Fleming’s Modern Anthropology ver
- Page 65 and 66: graduate school to study hydraulic
- Page 67 and 68: eligious and biblical “moral” (
- Page 69 and 70: produces various different types of
- Page 71 and 72: instance, features Lammerts; it con
- Page 73 and 74: early ASA members were strict creat
- Page 75 and 76: egan in 1965. Biology: A Search for
- Page 77 and 78: THE BIBLE-SCIENCE ASSOCIATION The B
- Page 79 and 80: space technology, and a member of t
- Page 81 and 82: California Public Schools (Segraves
- Page 83 and 84: Henry Morris had a successful caree
- Page 85 and 86: the protestors objected to, but the
- Page 87 and 88: and creationist thought. Interestin
- Page 89 and 90: Lubenow and said, “You’re a Chr
- Page 91 and 92: Among the attendees at the Summer I
- Page 93 and 94: educes his bigoted evolutionist pro
- Page 95 and 96: CHAPTER 4 THEORETICAL ISSUES: SCIEN
- Page 97 and 98: eality, nor is it intended to be. (
- Page 99 and 100: Assuming that present-day scientifi
- Page 101 and 102: devotes much of his book to the mor
- Page 103 and 104: Hitchcock. Their completely unfound
- Page 105 and 106: in the series did. Rev. Henry Beach
- Page 107 and 108: Materialism and Evolution (1932) is
- Page 109 and 110: (1984), he says: “The Bible is in
Rev. Zimmerman, a chemist and a theologian, was president of Concordia<br />
Lutheran College in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He edited a 1959 book Darwin, Evolution,<br />
and Creation. The four authors included Klotz, Wilbert Rusch (described later in the<br />
Creation Research Society section), Zimmerman himself, and a theology professor at<br />
Concordia Teachers College in Nebraska. The authors acknowledge some limited<br />
evolution as opposed to fixity of species.<br />
But there is much in evolutionary theory, in its accompanying philosophy, and in its denial of creation that<br />
we must reject and oppose. We hold that Christians must not confuse scientific fact, theory, and just plain<br />
scientific speculation. [1959:x]<br />
God reveals Himself in both nature and the Bible. “Neither <strong>for</strong>m of revelation can<br />
possibly contradict the other.” Scientific truth, however, is relative and changing; the<br />
Bible’s truth is absolute (though it may be misinterpreted).<br />
Zimmerman edited a 1966 volume called Essays from the Creationist Viewpoint;<br />
the later, better known edition (1972) is titled Creation, Evolution, and God’s Word.<br />
Authors are Klotz, Zimmerman, Rusch, Walter Lammerts (described later in the Creation<br />
Research Society section), and Richard Korthals, a <strong>for</strong>mer astronautics professor at the<br />
Air Force Academy, then teaching physics at Concordia Junior College in Ann Arbor.<br />
Zimmerman also wrote other creationist pamphlets, which insisted both on<br />
biblical inerrancy as well as that scientific evidence supported creationism. In one, We<br />
Are the Offspring of God (nd), he admits that he opposes evolution primarily <strong>for</strong> biblical<br />
and philosophical reasons rather than scientific ones: “It is indeed in the basic philosophy<br />
of evolution that we find the greatest objection to evolution.” Evolution claims that man<br />
has “risen from the swamp” and needs no Savior. This is bad science, says Zimmerman;<br />
but more importantly, it contradicts the Bible.<br />
EARLY CREATIONIST ORGANIZATIONS<br />
Although Rimmer was the only member of his Research <strong>Science</strong> Bureau, and<br />
wrote all the pamphlets and books that it published, the Bureau apparently did hold<br />
public meetings.<br />
The Religion and <strong>Science</strong> Association was organized in 1935 by Dudley Whitney,<br />
assisted by George McCready Price and Byron Nelson. According to its constitution, its<br />
members “assert their disagreement with the principle of evolution,” which is based on<br />
the assumption that nature be interpreted solely in terms of natural processes. Members<br />
affirm that God “is not hampered by any so-called ‘laws’ of nature,” and that they believe<br />
the biblical account of definite acts of fiat creation by God (quoted in Morris 1984:112).<br />
Morris, in his History of Modern <strong>Creationism</strong>, laments the fact L. Allen Higley was<br />
recruited to be the Association’s first president. Higley was not a strict young-earth<br />
Flood Geology creationist like the others; he believed in Gap Theory creationism. Morris<br />
suggests that Higley was chosen because he had a legitimate science Ph.D. (they did not),<br />
and occupied a prestigious position as professor of chemistry and geology at Wheaton<br />
College in Illinois, a prominent Christian school. Higley cannot be accused of being soft<br />
on evolution. He describes the purpose of his 1940 book as “to disprove evolution and<br />
many other false speculations which dishonor the Creator...” (1940:6).