Bible and evolution; Evolution (Biology) -- Religious aspects -- Christianity; Temple, Frederick, 1821-1902
(iii.) But the geological evidence is stronger still. If all these
creatures have arisen in succession, and perished, we may well ask,
“Where are their bones?” Each successive race, according to the theory,
has been sufficiently powerful to overpower its predecessors, and to
reproduce its own kind. It is clear, therefore, that we should naturally
look for the geological remains of those once-powerful animals. But here
we are met by the hard, stubborn, rocky fact, that there is no trace of
them in the geological record. We find the remains of A, B, C, D, etc.,
but between them there is a complete hiatus; and if there were 1000 links
between A and B, the geologist cannot show you one of them. He can show
you A, and he can show you B; but as for A 20, 30, and 40, he can only
tell you that they are not yet discovered. I know that some good
Christian people are afraid of geology, and in that I believe they make a
great mistake; for though I grant there may be danger in shallow,
superficial, theoretical geology, I never can doubt that the real record
of the rocks is in perfect harmony with the real record of Scripture.
So, in this instance, it has furnished us with an unanswerable proof that
the evolutionist theory is not founded in fact, and that nothing has yet
been discovered in the geological record to shake our confidence in the
grand, old, Scriptural statement, “God made the beast of the earth after
its kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creepeth
upon the ground after its kind: and God saw that it was good.” We all
know that it is not the object of the Book of Genesis to teach science;
and some, I grieve to think, are not afraid of calling it a myth, or even
a poem for the childhood of the world; but I venture to affirm that the
statement of the Inspired Book which describes each kind as a separate
creation is more in accordance with well-known geological facts, and is
therefore more scientifically accurate than the theories of those who
adopt the conjecture that the various kinds, species, or groups evolved
themselves either from each other or from a common stock.
(2) _Cosmical Evolution_.
But if this be the case with Biological Evolution, how is it with
Cosmical Evolution, or the evolution of inanimate matter? Bishop Temple
describes it as “that which begins with Laplace, and explains the way in
which the earth was fitted to be the habitation of living creatures;”
{11a} and again he says: {11b}
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account