Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Originally published in Creation 2, no 4 (October 1979): 9-10.
Any theory of the origin and history of life is a theory on the nature of life. Nowhere could this be more true, than theories or models or beliefs about the origin and history of man.
Theories about man’s origin and history are implicitly or explicitly statements about the nature of man: what man is really all about, man’s true self, man’s essence, the “things” which make us man, distinctly different from and similar to any other organism or structure to be found on the face of the earth.
Theories about man’s origin and history are implicitly or explicitly statements about the nature of man.Within the frameworks of either evolution or creation, one can no more separate the origin of the human brain from the origin of human thought and behavior, than we can separate Newton from physics. If any such separation is made its basis is arbitrary and without any value to science.
In biology text books, such as The Web of Life, students progress from the origin of man’s bones to man’s culture. In Professor William Keaton’s text, Biological Science, students move from physiology into the origin of behavior. Evolutionary theory is inherently committed to the concept that behavior and morality are just as much a product of mutation and natural selection, as is the shape of man’s nose or the distance between eyeballs.
The psychologists Freud and Skinner, could not separate their acceptance of the atheistic evolution of the body from their treatment of mind and behavior as products of atheistic evolution. There is no available section for books on creation under the heading of Science in the Dewey Library System—Dewey was only being consistent.
Gough Whitlam’s belief that the A.L.P. was an “Evolutionary Party . . . Darwinian,” was an influencing factor in how he believed society should function. To the same extent, Malcolm Fraser’s claim that “Life wasn’t meant to be easy,” relates directly to his beliefs about society, about man, and about origin and purpose.
With the impossibility of finding a boundary over which evolution cannot be extrapolated, one realizes that any theory, belief or model of origins is an all embracing view of life—a total philosophy. What can be said about evolution is also true of creation. There are no boundaries over which creation cannot be extrapolated.
What then are the characteristics of a successful view of origins? Any view of origins provides answers in four separate areas. Firstly, it is concerned with the origin of the human physiology, culture, marriage, religion, language. Secondly, the beliefs it proposes about origins are relevant in solving present day problems which both by definition and in reality are very much a product of the origin of things, e.g. disease, war, divorce, superstitution, gossip. Thirdly, it is predictive. It does say something about the future of man and the world we live in, e.g. Just how will the world end?—Bang or whimper?
Lastly, it is and must be vitally concerned with purpose. Any view of origins is inherently teleological, i.e. concerned with why, not just how! Science persons have long disregarded teleology as being legitimate, but no view of origins exists without it.
Creation as science must cater for all of these areas, or it has only limited and passing significance.
Of all expressed views about creation, from the atheistic ex nihilo creation of Fred Hoyle’s Steady State Hypothesis through to the “deductive creationism” of many modern creation theorists, only the Biblical outline of creation can provide a satisfactory basis for the origin of all things, the solution of real problems, the future of all things and of all things.