The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design

A fascinating history of creation science. I read this nearly 30 years ago. This is an updated edition, though still only 2006 so it might be somewhat dated already, but it's still an excellent book, so I would recommend that Logos get it.

It was fascinating to me to learn of all the infighting among the factions, and troubling how many people, once they started admitting evolution could have occurred and studying it, lost their faith.

VOTE HERE: https://feedback.logos.com/boards/logos-book-requests/posts/the-creationists-from-scientific-creationism-to-intelligent-design-expanded-edition

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MJ. Smith

and troubling how many people, once they started admitting evolution could have occurred and studying it, lost their faith.

This has always puzzled me despite having a strongly intelligent-design oriented father. Does this book provide concrete data - or references to actual studies - on the topic?

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1282596#Comment_1282596

and troubling how many people, once they started admitting evolution could have occurred and studying it, lost their faith.

This has always puzzled me despite having a strongly intelligent-design oriented father. Does this book provide concrete data - or references to actual studies - on the topic?

Unfortunately it is not available in digital format, so I can't check. I don't remember. I do know that it was very well researched (I wrote that in my notes about it at the time I read it in 1995). I suspect that many of those that had previously refused to entertain the possibility of evolution had based their refusal to look into it on the "house of cards" philosophy: "Well, if Gen 1 & 2 aren't literally true, then the whole thing falls apart." When they finally encountered evidence that they couldn't refute, it made them doubt the whole foundation of their faith. In their explorations, they probably weren't in touch with people who had made the transition from a literalist interpretation of Genesis 1 & 2 to a robust faith that can also handle belief in science and evolution, or with people who always been able to hold faith and science together. It's the "faith vs. science" people who get thrown for a loop when they find out that some of science they were taught not to trust is actually true.

It's still a miracle to me that I didn't lose my faith along the way. I grew up with a mother mired in fundamentalism who told me not to trust the science I was learning in school. She told me (among other things) that plate techtonics was false, that God had created the earth exactly how it is today, with the Grand Canyon as is, etc. But I encountered the right people in the right order as I was making my journey of letting that stuff go, so here I am, still a believer in a bigger God than the God of my childhood.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1282608#Comment_1282608

I grew up with a mother mired in fundamentalism who told me not to trust the science I was learning in school. She told me (among other things) that plate techtonics was false,

It is interesting how differently our parents handled it. My Father was a proud fundamentalist who spent his time reconciling science to the Bible rather than rejecting science. I was taught that one of the fathers of plate tectonics was a graduate of a college founded by my great-great grandfather (one I ultimately did my undergraduate work at). I learned to justify religion based on the existence of God and the evidence of the workings of God in some people. It was a foundation that led more to the exploration of a range of religious beliefs rather than a loss of faith. The members of my immediate family who abandoned church did so more because of a lack of interest in the topic than a loss of faith.