FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208  
209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   >>   >|  
phenomena are becoming continually more clear, as, _e.g._, the structure of orchids to their illustrious expositor. Having now cleared the ground somewhat, we may turn to the question what bearing Christian dogma has upon evolution, and whether Christians, as such, need take up any definite attitude concerning it. As has been said, it is plain that physical science and "evolution" _can_ have nothing whatever to do with absolute or primary creation. The Rev. Baden Powell well expresses this, saying: "Science demonstrates incessant past changes, and dimly points to yet earlier links in a more vast series of development of material existence; but the idea of a _beginning_, or of _creation_, in the sense of the original operation of the Divine volition to constitute nature and matter, is beyond the province of physical {262} philosophy."[267] With secondary or derivative creation, physical science is also incapable of conflict; for the objections drawn by some writers seemingly from physical science, are, as has been already argued, rather metaphysical than physical. Derivative creation is not a supernatural act, but is simply the Divine action by and through natural laws. To recognize such action in such laws is a religious mode of regarding phenomena, which a consistent theist must necessarily accept, and which an atheistic believer must similarly reject. But this conception, if deemed superfluous by any naturalist, can never be shown to be _false_ by any investigations concerning natural laws, the constant action of which it presupposes. The conflict has arisen through a misunderstanding. Some have supposed that by "creation" was necessarily meant either primary, that is, absolute creation, or, at least, some supernatural action; they have therefore opposed the dogma of "creation" in the imagined interest of physical science. Others have supposed that by "evolution" was necessarily meant a denial of Divine action, a negation of the providence of God. They have therefore combated the theory of "evolution" in the imagined interest of religion. It appears plain then that Christian thinkers are perfectly free to accept the general evolution theory. But are there any theological authorities to justify this view of the matter? Now, considering how extremely recent are these biological speculations, it might hardly be expected _a priori_ that writers of earlier ages should have given expression to doctrines
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   184   185   186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208  
209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

creation

 

physical

 

action

 

evolution

 

science

 

Divine

 

necessarily

 

interest

 

absolute

 

imagined


earlier

 

conflict

 

accept

 
supernatural
 

natural

 

writers

 
matter
 
supposed
 

primary

 

theory


Christian

 

phenomena

 
similarly
 

reject

 

believer

 

atheistic

 

deemed

 

extremely

 

naturalist

 

superfluous


biological

 

recent

 

conception

 

recognize

 

religious

 

doctrines

 

expression

 

theist

 

consistent

 

expected


priori

 

speculations

 

investigations

 
negation
 

perfectly

 

thinkers

 

denial

 

Others

 
general
 
simply