384 THE K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S u^ r ; Satan’sTriangle: Evolution, Philosophy and Criticism S. J . Bole, P rofessor of Biology, Wheaton College, Illinois In view of th e w idespread in te rest a t th is tim e in th e teaching of evolution, which has been greatly intensified by the recen t tria l in Daytòn, Tennessee, which resu lted in th e conviction of th è young school teacher who know ingly violated th e law of th e S tate and ta u g h t evolution to his pupils,— th is fifth article by P rofessor Bole will be of especial value as to th e p resen t statu s of th is theory. September 1925
P re sen t and F u tu re of Evolution W hat about the present and w hat about th e fu tu re of . evolution? “As ye sow so shall ye reap .” We have been sowing th e teachings of evolution for many years now, from th e k ind erg arten to th e .university. ' We m ust accord ingly expect to go on reaping its resu lts; materialism , mod ernism , and unbelief. Then again we read in 2 P eter: “But th ere were false prophets also among the people, even as th ere shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord th a t bought them and bring upon themselves sw ift destruction.” If weighed in the balance, evolution is found w anting; but th a t does not mean th a t it is or will be given up. One interesting point is shown by th e changes in books. Authors w riting from ten to tw enty years ago called evolu tion a theory; today, they call it a fact. The evidence in favor of it, during th is same time, has decreased ra th e r than increased. We shall quote briefly from a few of the newer textbooks. P rofessor Sinnot w rites:- -“As to th e fact of evolution th e re is now practically no doubt in the m inds of scientific men” (Botany, p. 229,' 1923).. A. 8. P earse of W isconsin w rites: “Among scientific men evolution is no longer on trial, bu t is accepted as a fact” (General Zoology, p. 342, 1917). H. H. Newman of Chicago w rites: “The theory of evolu tion is as definitely established as are th e Laws of Gravity, the Atomic Theory, The Ionic Theory” (Outlines of General Zoology, p. 406, 1924). Dr. Charles Schubert of Yale w rites: “There is now no question about th e tru th of organic evolution as opposed to the theory of special creation” (H istorical Geology, p. 49, 1924). P rofessor M artin of Iowa S tate College w rites: “Today it (evolution) is accepted not only by biologists, b u t by theologians and all thinking men” (Botany w ith Agricul tu ra l Applications, p. 562, 1919). The above are quite common statem ents as to evolution being a fact. These same w riters adm it, however, th a t th ere is much disagreem ent among themselves ‘as to its cause or causes and th a t b u t little evidence is available. Such statem ents as the following indicate this: “W hat is under discussion among th e biologists is the method by which n atu re has brought about the manifold organic changes th a t we see. No more in tricate problem confronts man. It is therefore not rem arkable th a t the entire solution or even th e main p arts of it are no t yet at h and” (Schubert, H istorical Geology, p. 50, 1924). “I t must be remembered th a t the generalization (fact of organic ev o lu tio n ), is not itself, and probably never can become, an established fac t” (Sm ith, Overton, G ilbert and others of Wisconsin, A Text book of General Botany, p. 350, 1923). “ It must be adm itted th a t as yet we do not fully under stand th e m anner in which evolution has tak en place and the 'factors which have been responsible for it. In the past th ere has been perhaps too much unsupported speculation on th e problem and too little pu rsu it of facts” (Sinnot, Botany, p. 229, 1923).
Chapter 4 THE PRESENT STATES OF EVOLUTION
IJROFESSOR LUTHER TOWNSEND in his excellent little book on the “ Collapse of Evolution’’ closes his volume w ith these words “Need there be a moment’s hesitation in saying th a t the hypothe sis of e v o lu tio n -ito g e th er w ith all other speculations so far as they are dependent upon it or are attached to it, new theology, higher and destructive criticism included— has collapsed beyond any possible recovery?” Is th is statem ent of Professor Townsend, w ritten tw enty years ago, coming tru e? Has the tidal wave of Evolution subsided during these tw enty years? ' Suppose we go to th e masses first and ask them. We find th a t many people believe the doctrine although they may not be able to define th e word “ Evolution.” They have read about it, h ere and there, in a paper, magazine or book. They have accepted it largely by faith w ithout thinking much about it. Suppose we next go to th e schools of our country. Some of them ta u g h t evolution twenty years ago. More teach it today. Many a Christian College has ceased to “ contend for th e fa ith ” during th e past two decades: Almost every university, college and high school in the country now teach evolution. S trangely enough th is teaching is no t confined to biology but may include English, history, sociology, psy chology and other subjects. More th an this, most of the theological sem inaries teach it. Scientific F iction In tw enty years, hundreds of books and thousands of articles have been w ritten in favor of the hypothesis. But few articles, pamphlets, and books have been w ritten against it. This la st is p artly due to the fact th a t most book and magazine publishers don’t care to publish any th ing against evolution. It is a subject th a t will “ play up” well especially in the hands of fiction w riters like Conan Doyle, H. G. Wells, Van Loon, and Thompson. The Amer ican public w ant something sensational and the teachings of evolution ra th e r th an the Bible best serve this purpose. But it may be objected some of these au tho rs like Wood ruff, Conkling, Osborn, Newman, and Thompson are profes sors in universities. Would you say th a t these serious w riters pu t fiction in th e ir articles and text books? Yes, they do. They, themselves, insist th a t a good scientist must have a ra re so rt of imagination. This kind of imagination can re su lt only in scientific fiction. However, w riters against th e doctrine are now seemingly on the increase. H ighly educated and scholarly men like Prof. F airb airn and Dr. Morton of England, and McCann, Ralph B arton P erry, and Louis T. Moore, of th is country are a few of these. In the Sunday School Times for April 25, 1925, we read these words: “More and more books of a sci entific character are appearing against the hypothesis of evolution. It is being weighed in th e balance, and in many respects is found w anting.” I
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs