Is God A Creationist?

editted by Roland Mushat Frye

I have several friends who are, I think, creationists; we generally avoid the topic by mutual consent, but if I were to recommend any literature on the issue to them, one of the top 2 or 3 books I'd suggest would be Is God A Creationist?, a series of essays editted by Roland Mushat Frye that brings a needed and rarely heard-from religious perspective to the creationism debate. The essays are well chosen and thoughtfully written; both the devout and the secular among us should find at least a few of interest. I found several absolutely fascinating.

Frye wrote the introduction and conclusion, and in between he presents eleven essays, some from Christian scientists, and some from noted theological authorities, including Langdon Gilkey, Professor of Theology at the Divinity School of the University of Chicago; Bruce Vawter, Professor of Theology at DePaul University; Conrad Hyers, Professor of Comparative Mythology and History of Religions at Gustavus Adolphus College; and Nahum M. Sarna, Hebraic scholar and Professor of Biblical Studies at Brandeis University.

In his introduction, Frye argues that not only has creationism as a science been soundly rejected by the scientific establishment, but that as a religion it ignores the consensus of modern biblical scholarship, mainstream religious thought, and centuries of Christian teaching from St. Augustine to John Calvin. "The [creationism] movement represents a kind of 'do-it yourself' approach to the knowledge of scientific and religious subjects..." To prove his point, Frye provides statements from, among others, Pope John Paul II of the Roman Catholic Church; the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church; and the 67th General Convention of the Episcopal Church. He also discusses the 1982 Arkansas lawsuit opposing a creationist-education law, whose plaintiffs included a surprising number of religious representatives: "the resident bishops of the Methodist, Episcopal, African Methodist, and Roman Catholic churches in the state, as well as the American Jewish Congress, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations..."

After he lays this groundwork, Frye nicely arranges the essays he has chosen into 4 sections. Section 1 provides some background on the creationist controversy itself. Richard Berry, for example, discusses "stories of ultimate meaning," and offers some ideas about why evolution and creation science generate so much antagonism on opposing sides. Langdon Gilkey, in the next essay, refutes the notion that this antagonism between science and religion is somehow natural or inevitable, a sadly common view that "theologians often characterize as the 'Walt Disney theory' of cultural history." Furthermore, he suggests, this view does nothing to further anyone's understanding. "Each time a child comes home and reports, 'I learned in school today that Genesis is wrong,' the seed is planted for a creationist reaction."

Though these essays are not confrontational, neither are they accommodating, and the second and third sections of the book present specific rebuttals of creationism, both from Christian scientists who discuss how they reconcile their own religion with modern geology and evolution; and from religious leaders who see no conflict between science and religion. Science is not atheistic, it is non-theistic, by definition, and as such does not threaten Christianity, despite the occasional overzealousness of individual scientists. Owen Gingerich phrases it this way:

Perhaps the ultimate truth is that the world was created only 6000 years ago, but since the Creator has filled it with wonderful clues pointing back 10 or 20 billion years, I am content to do my science by building a coherent picture of a multibillion-year-old creation, even though that may be only a grand hypothesis. Because it is the coherency of the picture and the systematic procedures for getting there - not the final truth - that science is all about.

This is important not only in restricting the scope of science, but in pointing out that creationism is not science because it is not useful; it does not partake of nor contribute to science's coherent picture.

Gingerich implies, and Davis A. Young makes explicit, the idea that the world, or the universe, is itself a book of God no less than the Bible, and is equally deserving of our reverence. Young, a geologist and conservative evangelical Christian, is quite earnest:

We are dealing with God's world and with God-created facts... We must handle the data reverently and worshipfully, yet we should not be afraid of where the facts may lead.

People must recognize that this modern, young-Earth, Flood-geology creationism is simply not truthful. It is simply not in accord with the facts that God has given. Creationism must be abandoned before even greater harm is done.

The final section is the one I found most fascinating; its essays are affirmations of the Christian faith, and include - as do a few essays in other sections - Christian, non-creationist, interpretations of Genesis. Indeed, if essays like this had been preached while I was still attending church, I might yet belong.

Richard Berry provides an intriguing answer to the question of "why God did not include evolution in Genesis."

When answering this, I ask the questioner to visualize a hill under starry skies, somewhere in the vicinity of Jerusalem... A strong, comforting voice calls the shepherd by name, "Hameed." The shepherd answers, "Yes, Lord," with more than a little fear and trembling... Would God have gone on to talk about electrons and protons, genes and DNA?

Conrad Hyers argues earlier in the book:

One of the ironies of the biblical literalism is that it shares so largely the reductionist and literalist spirit of the age. It is not nearly as conservative as it supposes. It is modernistic, and it sells its symbolic birthright for a mess of tangible pottage.

Nahum M. Sarna and Bernhard W. Anderson expand on this and give us a symbolic exegesis of Genesis, placing Genesis in a historical and religious context. Genesis as a myth establishes several key points, including that the God of Israel is God the creator; that God is sovereign even over the primal and chaotic waters (which in cosmogonies of surrounding cultures were responsible for bringing forth various feuding pantheons); that the universe is designed, and hence inherently ordered, and inherently good (again, versus the inherently chaotic and fearful view of other cultures); and that man's relationship to God is quite special.

To be sure, these affirmations are not stated in modern philosophical terms. But, as we have already pointed out, the audience of the biblical writers had its own literary idiom.

I do not mean to offend anybody with this review, and I apologize if I have. I think this is an important and significant book, and I would like to encourage you to read it, rather than be the cause of its rejection. I don't imagine that if you are a creationist it will convert you, but perhaps it will give you some sympathy with those Christians who are themselves scientists, and who write about and teach about a 5-billion year-old earth in which life has been evolving for the last 2 or 3 billion years. Likewise, if you are not very religious but are interested in the discussion of evolution, this book is a reminder that religion can be pursued as intellectually, carefully, and thoughtfully as science, and that antagonism between science and religion is not an inevitability. Both the scholarship and the faith in this book are compelling, and both are deserving of respect.

© 1996, Greg Tillman.

latest update: May 30, 2001
www: www.prairienet.org/gpf
email: gpf@prairienet.org