I am reading parts of John C. Whitcomb’s book The World That Perished which I included in this semester’s readings for my course on religion and science. I want students to get a first-hand impression of what young-earth creationists have to say, as well as of their critics. In college “teaching the controversy” may be appropriate – provided it is used as an opportunity to show where evidence clearly points to a particular conclusion, rather than leaving students with the impression that all viewpoints are equally valid.
Whitcomb has the audacity at one point to suggest that the question of what effects a world-wide flood would have ought to be left up to appropriate experts. He writes, “Hydraulic engineers, who devote their professional lives to the study of water action, ought to be our authorities on this subject” (p.71). He then directs the readers to the expertise of the hydraulic engineer Henry M. Morris!
There might be less controversy over science in the world today if individuals such as Morris had stuck to their area of expertise, as Whitcomb suggests would be appropriate. The biggest problem is that individuals who have no knowledge of the Biblical languages or Biblical scholarship nevertheless feel they can pronounce on matters of Biblical interpretation simply because they feel strongly about it, and the same goes for evolution and many other subject.
Interested in knowing the facts about evolution? Read something by one of the world’s eminent biologists. Interested in knowing about geology? Ask a geologist.
Interested in building a dam? Then you should ask Henry Morris.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In