Customer Reviews

Is God a creationist?: The religious case against creation-science

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

While most experts in the area of Creation/Evolution debate have their audience believing the entire dilemma revolves around scientific method and accompanying extremist propaganda, there are some biblical scholars who want people to understand that the issue should never have progressed to the scientific level. We need to take a step back and examine the traditional hermeneutical method applied to the Genesis creation accounts, and do so in light of the ancient Hebrews' neighboring cosmologies. Frye has edited a book of contributions from scholars who herald this message: the issue exists today because of neglect of authorial intent in Genesis, invalid criticism hurled at the scientific community, and because some literalists want to attribute motives of anti-theism and anti-morality to scientists. While I favored Conrad Hyers' contribution entitled, "Biblical Literalism: Constricting the Cosmic Dance," all contributions are intelligently well versed. I especially appreciated Hyers' article because he identifies how our literalistic present day culture forces a shade over our eyes as we read ancient literature, which is part of the crux of the issue. People fail to recognize that the literalists have misidentified the literary genre of the Genesis creation accounts. The credibility of Christianity as being an intellectual faith is at risk because of the Creation biblical literalists, and by publishing this book, Frye acknowledged that he refuses to standby and watch. It is September 2001 as I write this. Many new books on the Creation/Evolution controversy have hit the market the past few years. It is my hope that Frye's book will be reprinted in light of the recent surge in interest of this dilemma.

Roland Mushat Frye (ed.), Is God a Creationist?: The Religious Case Against Creation Science (Scribner, 1983)

Had enough of scientists trying to debunk creation science and religionists laughing at them? This is a refreshing change of pace: a collection of essays written by various religious scholars and leaders debunking creation science. Frye collects eleven essays by Christians (both Catholic and Protestant) and Jews that provide alternate explanations of Genesis that don't contradict the scientific evidence at all. Most of them castigate the creationists, at least in passing, for attempting to make the Bible do something it wasn't meant to do.

This is an absolute must for anyone who finds him or herself getting into arguments with young-earth creationists on a regular basis, for any ammo you can add to your quill is valuable, and ammo that works on their level is doubly so. It's also a good one if you're just interested in the subject in general; the writing, as it is in most anthology-style books, is inconsistent (interestingly, the driest and toughest of these essays comes from Pope John Paul II), but when it's readable, it's perfect: couched in layman's terms but without talking down to the reader. A fine book for rounding out your arguments. ****

This 1983 collection of essays contains contributions from personalities as diverse as Pope John Paul II; "old earth" creationist Davis Young (author of books such as Christianity and the Age of the Earth and Creation and the flood: An alternative to flood geology and theistic evolution); and Asa Gray (a famous American botanist with whom Darwin had a noteworthy correspondence; see The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin: Including an Autobiographical Chapter. Edited by his son. Volume 1).

The editor notes in the Preface, "As editor, my responsibility has been collect a group of essays which would make clear the central understandings of divine creation within the mainstreams of biblical religion (including the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Jewish traditions). On this issue the ecumenical consensus is impressive indeed. Out of the available material I have selected eleven essays as most pertinent and useful for the inquiring general reader. In addition to gathering and editing these, I have contributed an introductory 'overview' which places the issues in the broad context of biblical interpretation, religious doctrine, and history. And I have provided an epilogue to suggest a course for the future which, while being true to past traditions,may provide a hopeful exodus from our present difficulties."

Bruce Vawter writes concerning the late priest-scientist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's renowned work The Phenomenon of Man, "Though warmly welcomed, however, by religionist and scientist alike---as has been poignantly remarked, the English edition of Teilhard's remarkable book, published posthumously, bore the Imprimatur of no Catholic bishop but rather of Julian Huxley---no one would claim that either science or religion, on reflection, has accepted the effort as leading to a completely satisfactory result. Indeed, as is well known, the Congregation of the Holy Office, the watchdog of orthodoxy of Teilhard's own church, was moved in 1962 to issue a monitum, a caution against hasty and wholehearted acceptance of his theses."

The editor closes on the note, "Neither the Bible itself, nor the Christian tradition as a whole ... requires that we ... restrict ourselves to a literalistic dogma that the earth is flat, that the whole universe revolves around the earth, and that the moon is one of the great lights of heaven... (Nor are we) required as Christians to maintain that the earth was created in six calendar days, or by a digital adjustment in six thousand years, when everything which has been learned by the most careful and honest scientific analysis of the book of the Works of God points to different conclusions."