82
T h e
K i n g ' s
B u s i n e s s
February 1928
Errors of Fundamentalist Science B y D udley J oseph :W h itney Exeter, California -
M A N Y person who has seen much of the evidence JgP3pjL against evolution cannot help but be impressed jrajiea with its value. A t the same time we, should not Jnfo|L shut our eyes to the fact that scientists have almost unanimously decided that evolution is so true that .they do not pay any attention to argu ments against it. In justice we cannot decide that this is altogether the fault of the scientists. They evidently are in closer touch with the facts of nature than are most o f their critics. There are in fact many very convincing reasons for be lieving in at least a large amount of evolution, and if in addition it happens that much o f the conviction in favor
to have Genesis defended and evolution therefore opposed on just that scheme o f earth history. Now, in spite of that apparent harmony between ¡Gen esis and geologic, history, evolution cannot possibly bp op posed with any degree o f consistency when that scheme o f earth history is adopted. When, therefore, a person sets forth that scheme o f earth history and still fights evolu tion, the geologists and educators generally, who know far more about science than he does, merely smile and go on their way, turning to modernism or agnosticism. ’ It is hard to blame them under the conditions, particularly since the evidence for evolution seems to be very strong. The situation is this: The theory of geologic history
of evolution comes from mistakes in fundamentalist science, an ur gent need exists for the funda mentalists to correct their errors. Without the slightest question, in a matter relating to science a person is judged more by his er rors than by the points where he is correct. I f he makes serious blunders in presenting his case, an intelligent man is just about justified in deciding that he does not know what he is talking about, and so setting his whole case aside. I f fundamentalists make serious mistakes in their science they thereby encourage belief in evolution. There is no question but that
just outlined presupposes; that many millions of- years have passed since life began on earth and that a fairly satisfactory se quence o f plant and animal spe cies appears to have existed from very simple forms up to highly organized modern forms. I will ask any reasonable man: Is it at all reasonable to accept a series of plant and animal species like that, running back for 60,000,000 or 800,000,000 years, and then to oppose evolution? O f course it is not. Yet some fundamental ists do just that-thing. Naturally educators believe in evolution. Mistaken fundamentalist science [is partly to blame.
Mr. Whitney has furnished us with three articles bearing upon the subject of Evolution. In our next issue we will pub lish the second article: “ Genesis and Geology," and it will only be fair for the reader to await Mr. Whitney’s final blow before rendering a decision. The editors do not necessarily commit them selves ,to all of the author’s conclusions, but feel that the articles are of Isuch a nature as should prove profitable to pur readers..” They are preeminently fair, and we feel it is a good thing for us to frankly face such criticisms as. he makes.
the evidence o f science is overwhelmingly for creation and, for that matter, for the general course of events outlined in Genesis. There is no question, either, but that Genesis and creation have been defended in many cases with more zeal than knowledge, to the injury o f the whole cause. In presenting, therefore, an outline of the errors in funda mentalist science it will, I hope, be understood that I am not in any way upholding the theory of evolution. Quite the contrary. I am merely trying to put the opposition to it on a sound basis. G eology and G enesis When modem theories of geology were becoming established, a very close accord seemed to be established between geology and Genesis, so that noted and devout geologists were strong supporters of Genesis. The earth being “ waste and void” ' corresponded with the condition o f the earth when it was so warm that the oceans were in the air as hot vapor. Then the cooling o f the earth until the oceans formed, letting the light penetrate the atmos phere, first in diffused form, then clearly, the fact that in the supposed geologic history ,water animals preceded land animals and reptiles preceded beasts and beasts men, all made geologic history and Genesis appear to go hand in hand. Still later G- Frederick Wright developed his noted theory o f a post glacial deluge, and the whole series of earth history, including the Deluge, seemed to fit the sup posed findings of science. It is still extremely common
A ge T heory E xploded There is now no excuse for holding this theory of geologic ages. George McCready Price has demonstrated very clearly the underlying weaknesses o f the theory of evolutionary geology and demonstrated also the scientific basis fqr a belief in the theory of a great aqueous catas trophe like the deluge o f Genesis. Yet it is not uncommon in some fundamentalist papers to find evolution fought on Price’s theory in one issue, and on the theory of geologic ages, which is in definite Conflict with Price’s views, in a later issue. A thing like that is unfortunate. If a person cannot understand the problem clearly, it is very proper for him to take the Bible on faith, but when he attempts on the basis o f science to fight theories that pass as sci ence and blunders into important inconsistencies, he does more harm than good. A fter the whole problem is finally settled it looks as if the ones who have been closest to the actual fact the whole time will not be those who altered their views to fit every change in geologic theories, but the simple believers who knew nothing about science, bui determined to accept Genesis literally and entirely. Certainly the Bible de fenders who tried to fit Genesis to science and so decided that the “ days” of creation were millions of years long, have been badly mistaken, and in addition they have played into the hands of modernism and infidelity.
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online