Science in Christian Perspective
Letter to the Editor
The Final Resolution of the Evolution Controversy
C. Gordon Winder Professor of Geology
University of Western Ontario
London, Canada
N6A SB?
From: JASA 32 (September 1980): 191-92.
Recently I was provided with a copy of the ASA Selected Readings
Origins and Change.
Your opening statement includes "Evolution can be considered
without denying
creation" with which I agree completely. Such modern Christian scientists
as de Nouy. MacKay. Rhodes, and numerous members of the ASA would
agree, a conflict
between Scripture and biological evolution does not exist. And yet this volume
reveals a conflict does exist. Why? I have been led to an interpretation that
Evolution -the rejected (by literal creationists) cornerstone of
biological (actually
all) science, is the connecting link between religion, specifically
Christianity,
and orthodox science.
God created life by infusing that spiritual attribute into an
appropriately structured
organic molecule (see Sc. Amer., Sept., 1978); itself a product of an
evolutionary
process, about 4.0 billion years ago. God created "man" as
a spiritual
being (Gen. 1:27, also Ps. 0430 and Zechariah 12:lb) about 7-8000
years ago which
corresponds approximately with the Mesolithic-Neolithic boundary by
infusing the
human attribute into an already existing hominid body or bodies. The
raising /of
man/from/the dust/of' the ground' (Gen. 2:7) is not ex nihilo as that is not
a bringing/ into/ existence/ from/ nothing process. Geo. 2:7b is a
variation of Gen.
1:27. The evolution of the hominid bodies by the mechanism of
biological descent
with change can be readily interpreted in Gen. 1:25a. The process of speciation
can also be interpreted. This whole relationship was evident to me
about the first
time I ever read Genesis -in fact in the short space of two months, just three months after the
first time I ever opened the Book. And to think this controversy has raged on
for 120 years and presently seems to he intensifying. I think somebody wants a
solution! Now!
Why does it persist? Some are determined to maintain the differences, described
in numerous books with large sates and several editions. I he minds of some are
so rock-bound, they cannot change. Many are so confused, they don't know whom
to believe. Some are trying to sort out a mountain of literature
containing proposals,
counter proposals, charges and countercharges, all thoroughly laced
with personal
insults, innuendoes and false accusations. Let me ask a simple
question. Has the
time not come for a solution to surface? Aren't there more important
issues?"
The literal creationists are now circulating a model bill for
submission to state
legislatures and Senates requiring equal time for creation and
evolution in public
school education-the two model approach. I have learned by unexpected
circumstances
that copies have been sent to 41 of the 50 states. Now consider the expenditure
of time and money for just 20 states in hearings, research,
legislative and Senate
debates, educational restructuring, teacher retraining, lawyers,
clerks, printing,
books, - and then testing in the courts. Be prepared! At present, I understand
that California requires fair treatment in free texts for the lower
grade classes.
Actions are presently in progress in Florida, South Carolina, Georgia, Illinois
(I wrote a Senator yesterday), probably Iowa, with intentions this
year for Oklahoma,
Idaho and where else who knows. I feel certain the San Diego group
have lobbyists
in Sacramento.
If Scripture and biological evolution are compatible as I can demonstrate, then
there is no conflict on the origin of man as interpreted in the
spheres of religions
and scientific knowledge; then scientific creationism, like geocentricity, is
a sophism. The mountain of literature should be treated according to
Acts 19:19.
Do I sense you saying I don't believe it? - Well, Galations 1:20. It
you and other
ASA members will join in spreading this understanding, the sooner
will this conflict
come to its just demise. Will I write out the interpretation? No-like the Good
News it has to be heard-so Luke 14:35b. I look forward to the time when I can
explain -but remember my first question will he -'would you like to see an end
to this century plus old controversy and are you prepared to consider
a solution
based on Scripture-- not science'?"