Science in Christian Perspective
Origins and the Bible
JOEL BLOCK
Brien McMahon High School
Norwalk, Connecticut 06854
From: JASA 29 (June 1977): 64-67.
The Creation of the Solar System and the Formation of Earth
Any agreement on the origin and formation of the solar system between
theology and science seems impossible. However, upon careful scrunity, there are
correlations that can be made. It is sometimes overlooked that the book of
Genesis was presented to illiterate Israelites. Scientists hypothesize to a
specialized, dedicated group of intelligent individuals. The background of each
audience dictates different approaches to a common topic. For the purpose of this paper, the Old Testament is
treated, not as a holy book, but a text utilized for the education of
the people.
The method of instruction can be considered similar to that used by
the teachers
of today-directing the presentation of facts at the student's academic level.
In this context the biblical concept of solar system formation seems similar to
that of modern science.
Nebular Hypothesis
The most widely accepted scientific thoughts on solar system origin are based upon a nebular hypothesis. Pierre
Laplace (1749-1827)
suggested that all universal matter was distributed through space in the form
of a gaseous cloud. Concentrations formed and grew by gravitational attraction.
If the cloud were rotating, contraction would produce an increased velocity and
a disk-shaped form. Inevitably the rapid rotation would lead to instability and
the release of gaseous rings to remove the unstable condition. However, further
contraction would create other instabilities and the production of additional
rings. Eventually the center of the cloud concentration would become hot enough
to form the sun. The escaped ring would cool and coalesce forming protoplanets.
However, contracting protoplanets would also produce instabilities resulting in
the release of smaller rings eventually becoming their satellites.
Although once
widely accepted, Laplace's hypothesis proved mathematically unsound (Menzel, 1970).
Tidal Hypothesis
Thomas Chamberlain (1843-1928) and Forest Moulton (1872-1952) of the University
of Chicago proposed that huge tides of material were produced in the
sun's outer
rim by the close passage of another star. The gravitational forces of
the intruder
caused the sun to release a tremendous quantity of material to space.
As the passing
star disappeared, the escaped material encircled the sun, cooled, and congealed
into lumps called planetessimals. Larger planetessimals swept up smaller ones
and other debris eventually forming our planets.
A variation of this tidal hypothesis was suggested by Sir James Jeans and Sir
Harold Jeffreys. The tidal effect of the passing star caused the sun to release
a long filament which cooled and broke into protoplanet contractions (Menzel,
1970).
Other Hypotheses
Fred Hoyle of Cambridge University postulated that the sun was once a
double star.
One of the pair became unstable, exploded, and headed into space
leaving a trail
of gas and dust. The planets were said to have developed from these
remains (Menzel,
1970).
C. F. von Weizsacker and C. P. Kuiper produced another nebular
variation. Several
condensations formed in the original cloud. The smaller concentrations gathered
material as they orbited the forming sun. Some of the concentrations may even
have been inside the sun's atmosphere. Solar wind and radiation pressure were
to have driven material into space leaving the
protoplanets behind (Menzel, 1970).
All of the above hypotheses are founded on a gaseous origin; they are
modifications
of a common theme.
The Biblical Account
In the consideration of biblical creation, it is paramount that the
reader concentrate
on the following factors: (1) the nature of the audience, (2) the basic ideas,
not the figurative presentation, and (3) the sequential order of creation. The
six days of Biblical creation are found in the book of Genesis.
In simple terms, the first day's accomplishments
(Gen. 1:1-5) include the creation of heaven, an unformed earth, and
light in the
midst of darkness.
In this age of confrontation concerning the teaching of biblical creation in science classrooms, it seems ironic that the Bible and modern science agree on the sequence of cosmogony and the evolution of planet Earth.
Elementary science students know that matter without form can exist
in a gaseous
state. The hypotheses discussed above agree that the solar system
originally began
as a gaseous cloud. They believe that the greatest concentration of
material contracted
to form the sun, and the planets, including earth, formed from the
gases surrounding
this center. It is also believed that the nebula was originally dark until the
sun produced its own light.
The Bible concurs, stating that initially "the earth was unformed",
that "darkness was upon the face of the deep", and then God
said, "Let
there be light".
In the second day of biblical creation (Gen. 1:6-8), the author (or
authors) begins
to expound upon a theory of planetary development. The ancients, including the
Israelites, were geocentrically oriented; therefore, the prime concern is with
the formation of earth. The Israelites are informed that the earth had cooled
to a liquid state; however, there were two divided liquids. These former desert
slaves were acquainted with several liquids: blood, oil, water, wine, and milk.
Of the five, only water is not produced from a biological source. The
water could
have been one of the divided fluids of earth. Liquid rock, lava, which contains
a great deal of water, had probably never been seen by the Israelite
slaves. Therefore,
by referring to the division of two waters, it is suggested that two different
liquids composed earth: clouds above and liquid rock below (Block, 1976).
Many scientists believe that the earth may have passed from a gaseous
to a molten
or partially molten stage in the condensation of its material (Clark and Stern,
1968). This action was probably induced by the gravitational attraction of its
material or the release of heat energy by the radioactive decay of its elements
(Luce, 1955). Water vapor in addition to methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and carbon
dioxide, escaped during the cooling process, forming earth's primal atmosphere
and enshrouding the liquid earth with a thick cloud cover (Urey, 1972).
At the conclusion of the second day, a period of
cooling is stated by denoting a liquid earth. The above scientific hypotheses
supports this idea.
In verse nine further cooling is suggested by the presence of the first solid,
land. Some scientists believe that the thick cloud cover surrounding earth kept
the sun's light from penetrating to the liquid rock surface. Water falling from
the cloud could have cooled the surface but would immediately steam hack into
the atmosphere. Eventually solid rock began to congeal when the
surface temperature
reached 1,0002,000 degrees Fahrenheit (Luce, 1955). Many argue that the cooling
earth became encrusted over its whole surface with a thin layer of
light granitie
material forming land on top of heavier basaltic rock. Some say that the
entire earth was
basaltic with differentiation of material caused by the process of deformation
(Kay, 1972). Be that as it may, laboratory experiments leave little doubt that
granite, of which the continents are made, originally came from hot
magmas (Tuttle,
1955).
Eventually the temperature of the surface fell below the boiling
point of water.
The great, allencompassing cloud condensed and precipitated a deluge.
Water began
to accumulate. Cooling lava and volcanic emissions provided additional water to
the low-lying areas, ultimately creating the oceans. Genesis states
that the sea
was "gathered together" and "the dry land became
visible".
Twentieth century earth scientists, beginning with Alfred Wegener in
1912, agree
with the claim that the sea, now called Panthalassa, was together. If the sea
water was together, then the land must have been together.
Overwhelming evidence
has confirmed that a universal land mass, Pangaea, did exist (Dietz and Holden,
1972). Sections have since split and have drifted to their present
location, probably
by means of convection currents in the earth's mantle (Wilson, 1972).
Today there
is almost universal acceptance of the Theory of Continental Drift. Moses or the
authors of Genesis may have been its first proponents.
The third day of creation, as well as the fifth and sixth days, are concerned
with biological development and are the topic of the second part of
this paper.
In the fourth day of Biblical creation (Gen. 1:14-19), a contradiction seems to
appear between the Bible and science. The sun seems to have been created twice
-on the first and fourth days. One school of scientific thought believes that
a dense primitive atmosphere containing the volatile constituents of water and
carbon dioxide surrounded the hot earth. As the cooling earth
solidified, temperatures
dropped sufficiently permitting the water to condense, precipitate, and collect
in low-lying areas. The removal of water from the atmosphere would
thin the cloud
cover, ultimately permitting the light from the sun, moon, and stars to reach
the surface of the land (Strahler, 1972). In other words, the sun was
not created
again but now could be seen from the surface of the earth. As is
indicated, "God
set them in the expansion of the heaven to give light upon the
earth" (Block,
1976).
In this age of confrontation concerning the teaching of biblical
creation in science
classrooms, it seems ironic that the Bible and modern science agree
on the sequence
of cosmogony and the evolution of planet Earth. The difference in wording seems
due to the nature of the audiences receiving the information. In
addition, certain
biblical statements, figuratively interpreted, seem to make the
authors of Genesis
pioneers in cosmogony, planetary development, and continental drift. It is my
belief that the Bible and modern scientific hypotheses of creation
are, in fact,
alike, but expressed in different terms.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF LIFE
Plant Life Biological creation begins during the third day and continues on days five and six (Gen. 1:11-13). The Bible implies that the first
living organisms on earth were plants. Many scientists say that the
early atmosphere
of earth, unlike today, probably consisted of methane, ammonia, carbon dioxide,
hydrogen, and water vapor (Urey, 1972). Atmospheric oxygen increased as solar
radiation dissociated water into hydrogen and oxygen. Most of the hydrogen, the
lightest element, escaped from earth's gravitational pull. Carbon
combining with
oxygen as carbon dioxide, made plant life possible. The photosynthetic process
released additional oxygen until there was an abundance of free
atmospheric oxygen
required for animal development (MeAlester, 1968).
It is also known that plants occupy the first trophic level in the food chain
and are the source of energy transferred to all other organisms (Odum, 1968).
Since plants are responsible for food and oxygen, scientists and the
Bible agree
that plants preceded animal life on earth.
The most ancient organic life forms discovered to date are fossils of
microscopic
bacteria and blue-green algae found in Precambrian rock in South
Africa: the Fig
Tree Series and the underlying Onverwacht Series. Spheroidal forms
exist in both
series while the former also includes rod-shaped, bacterium-like
bodies. The Fig
Tree structure has been proven organic and is presently the oldest
known remains
of life on earth, 3100 mya (Dunbar and Waage, 1969).
The first land plants were seedless, pencil-like, organisms called Psilopsids
which lacked both roots and leaves. Photosynthesis was accomplished
in the stem.
Horizontal portions of the stem covered the ground functioning as roots. These
oldest known vascular fossil plants were found in the upper Silurian deposits
in England. Other seedless plants including Lycopsids (clubmosses), Sphenopsida
(horsetails), and Pteropsida (ferns) appear during the Devonian producing small
herbs, and eventually, seedless trees. These trees contributed to the
coal forests
of the late Carboniferous (McAlester, 1968). By late Carboniferous and Permian
time, seedless trees were giving way to gymnosperms, seed bearing flora, which
could reproduce without external moisture. Cycads (Palmlike), ginkgoes (with a
fan-shaped leaf), and conifers first appear in the Carboniferous, and developed
into great forests during Triassic and Jurassic periods.
The more highly developed Angiosperms (flowering plants) first appear
in the lower
Cretaceous. They rapidly become the dominant plants and remain so to this day.
Their evolutionary success is probably based upon its fruit-enclosed seeds and
seed dispersal mechanisms (McAlester, 1968).
It is interesting to note the sequence of biblical floral creation:
grass, herbs
bearing seed, and fruit trees. The Old Testament could have indicated
that plants
evolve from small or simple organisms to more complex structures
(Block, 1976).
It is scientifically known that different kinds of life succeeded one
another-that
life is continually evolving. The "fittest" individuals
pass their desirable
traits on to the next generation. Over many generations, selective reproduction
by the most successful individuals would lead to adaptive changes in
species and, ultimately, to new species (McAlester, 1968). Organisms do
become more complex
by developing adaptations to meet environmental changes.
The Biblical "grass" could have represented small low-lying plants to
the Israelites. Seed bearing herbs could be a reference to gymnosperm
herbs. The
final plants and highest level of development mentioned on the third
day of creation
are fruit trees which do represent the more highly advanced angiosperms. It is
coincidental that Biblical creation seems to parallel principles of
basic evolutionary
thought (Block, 1976).
Fish and Birds (Gen. 1:20-23)
In the Ediacara Hills of South Australia, M. F. Glaessner of the University of
Adelaide in 1947 found fossils of what was to be the oldest known living animal
life. In a late Precambrian to lower Cambrian formation, impressions attributed
to jellyfish, segmented worms, and sea pens were discovered, as well as several
other impressions that resemble no known organisms (Dunhar and Waage,
1969).
The oldest and most primitive fish were the agnaths, jawless fish, found during
the Ordovician. Some were suspension-feeders straining plankton from
the surface,
while others moved along the bottom taking in the organic-rich
sediments. Lampreys
and hagfishes, which attach to and suck blood from other vertebrates,
are today's
jawless descendants of the agnath. By Devonian time, "great sea
monsters"
had developed as exemplified by the Dinichthys, a jawed, carnivorous
fish of the
Class Placodermi, These fish grew to a length of thirty feet with a
mouth several
feet wide. Late Devonian brought their decline as sharks and bony fish became
dominant (McAlester, 1968).
The ability to fly is an adaptation of great advantage. It permits an animal to
escape from danger easily and establish a wider range in which to
search for food.
The first flying animals were insects.. The fossilized wing of a
dragon fly-like
species was found in rocks of Carboniferous age. This insect had a three-foot
wingspats making it the largest insect known. Flying reptiles,
Pterosaurs, existed
during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. Skin was attached to one
long finger
on each side which functioned as a wing. The wing span of some
Pterosaurs measured
more than twenty-five feet, making them the largest animal to fly. Their fossil
remains were last found in Upper Cretaceous rock (McAlester, 1968).
Once again, the "coincidence" of biblical creation follows
the evolutionary
pattern of development from the simple or small to the more complex creatures.
Is the Bible preaching evolution?
Creation of Man (Gen. 1:24-31)
Scientists believe that man has "dominion" over the earth because of
superior intellect; therefore, the evolutionary trend should parallel cerebral
development. The Bible seems to deviate from evolution since cattle
are more advanced
than "creeping things". I believe that this deviation may
not have been
by accident, but for the understanding of the Israelites. Cattle use
little intelligence
because their basic needs, food and protection, are provided by man.
"Creeping
things" generally have less cerebral growth; however, they are faced with
"decisions" concerning food and
It is my belief that the Bible can be used as a scientific reference and that the biblical and scientific hypotheses of biological development are alike, but expressed in different terms.
predators. To the ancients, this could have denoted an
act of "thinking". The creation of "beasts" bring to mind
larger and more cunning carnivorous animals capable of higher
intelligence. Lastly,
man, possessing the power of reason, is the top of the intellectual ladder. The
Bible figuratively seems to indicate domination on land by
intellectual as opposed
to physical evolution (Block, 1976).
The Bible and modern scientists seem to have the
same hypothesis on the development of living organisms. The
difference in wording
could be due to the nature of the audiences receiving the information. It is my
belief that the Bible can be used as a scientific reference and that
the biblical
and scientific hypotheses of biological development are alike, but expressed in
different terms.
REFERENCES
Abel!, George. 1966. Exploration of the Universe. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
New York. pp. 516-536, 577-590.
Ballard, Sir Edward. 1972. "The Origin of Oceans". Continents Adrift.
Scientific American, Incorporated. New York.
pp. 88-97.
Block, Joel 1976. "The Bible and Science on Creation,"
Journal of Geological
Education, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 58-60.
Clark, Thomas and Cohn W. Steam. 1968. Geological Evolution of North America.
The Ronald Press Company. New
York. pp. 74-81, 508.
Diets, Robert S. and John C. Holden. 1972. "The Breakup of Pangaea".
Continents Adrift. Scientific American, Incorporated. New York. pp.
102-113.
Dunham, Carl 0. and Karl M. Waage. 1969. Historical Geology. John
Wiley and Sons,
Incorporated. New York. pp. 159167.
Hurley, Patrick M. 1972. "The Confirmation of Continental
Drift". Continents
Adrift. Scientific American, Incorporated. New York. pp. 57-67.
Kay, Marshall. 1972. "The Origin of Continents". Continents Adrift.
Scientific American, Incorporated. New York. pp. 16-20.
Leeser, Isaac. The Pentateuch. Hebrew Publishing Company. New York.
pp. 1-3.
Luce, Henry, Ed. 1955. The World We Live In. Time Incorporated. New York, pp.
4-13.
Matthews, Samuel W. 1973. "The Changing Earth". National Geographic
Magazine. Vol. CXLIII. pp. 1-37.
MeAlester, A. Lee. 1968. The History of Life. Prentice-Hall,
Incorporated. Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey. pp. 4-144.
Mcnrel, Donald H. 1970. Astronomy. Random House, New York. pp.
218-226, 260-273.
Odum, Eugene P. 1968. Fundamentals Of Ecology. W. B. Saunders
Company. Philadelphia.
pp. 4647.
Sarna, Nahum M. 1972. Understanding Genesis. Schocken Books. New
York. pp. 1-36.
Strahler, Arthur N. 1972. Planet Earth: Its Physical Systems Through Geologic
Time. Harper and Row Publishers. New York. p. 283.
Tuttle, 0. Frank. 1955. "The Origin of Granite". Scientific
American.
W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco. pp. 3-6.
Urey, Harold C. 1972. "The Origin of the Earth". Continents Adrift.
Scientific American, Incorporated. New York. pp. 4-9.
Weaver, Kenneth F. 1974. "The Incredible Universe".
National Geographic Magazine. Vol. CXLV. pp. 589-625.
Wilson, J. Tuzo. 1972. "Continental Drift". Continents Adrift.
Scientific American, Incorporated. New York. pp. 41-55.