A memoriam to Margaret Gray Towne appeared in the August 2024 issue of SciTech†. A longtime member of PASTCF, she served on the Executive Board and contributed to the journal. With the permission of her children, we are pleased to reprint the Preface to her book Honest to Genesis, redacted for length. The book may be borrowed online from Internet Archive, https://archive.org/
Why this book? For most of the 20th Century, American Christendom was divided over how the creation accounts and Genesis should be interpreted. Much confusion, discord, and even animosity resulted. This division continues and can be attributed to two major causes. First, many Americans are not well grounded in science. They are not familiar with its definition, its purposes, its limitations, and its operations. More specifically, they are not informed of the technical rationale and supporting data of evolutionary theory. Second, many Christians do not know how to appropriately read the many genres of the ancient and, in some cases, puzzling and mysterious literature in the Bible. They are not aware of the scholarly means of interpretation that can be applied to the scriptures which pertain to creation. These factors have led to much confusion concerning the subjects of creationism, “creation science,” evolutionary theory, evolutionary naturalism and materialism, the Christian Doctrine of Creation, intelligent design, the origin of life, and the origin of the universe.
I am concerned that Christianity has lost respect in general, and from the scientific community in particular because of this conflict
Variety of opinion as to the appropriate means of interpreting the Bible’s creation accounts contributes to considerable perplexity. Many young people are confused and often become disillusioned as they learn one thesis about origins from loving parents, pastors, and church school teachers and another from respected instructors in biology, geology, or paleontology classes in high school or college. Conflict arises as they attempt to integrate what they are taught in the science classroom with what they learned in the church school classroom. The need to be loyal to the latter can result in ignoring rational thinking and observable data, leading to a faulty knowledge base. If, on the other hand, they choose to side with rationality, departure from the faith may be a logical, albeit unnecessary, outcome. Either way, everyone, including the church, loses. It must be candidly admitted that the kingdom of God is endangered rather than furthered by the internal discord engendered by the creationism/ evolution conflict. If these issues could be resolved, much gain would accrue to the cause of Christ.
An additional motivation for writing this book came because I, a Christian, have traveled the scenic, circuitous, and often arduous journey to evolutionary understanding and I feel the experience could have been eased if the data had been comprehensively presented in a manner that was scholarly yet sensitive to my religious apprehensions. It is my sincere desire that this book will help clarify issues for questioning Christians, both young and old.
That misinformation and misunderstanding are extremely common with respect to these subjects became apparent in the numerous interviews conducted and questionnaires collected while I was gathering data for a dissertation on whether Christians employ critical thinking as they form or modify belief on creationism and organic evolution. Also, a lack of clarity on these issues has been manifest in countless discussions I have had with Christians over many years, and with students in my biology classes as well as colleagues across the departments of the university. Inaccuracies abound on websites and in varied publications and videos. In short, surprisingly few are well informed about the science or the theology that relate to the controversy surrounding evolution and creationism. Encouragement to write this book came from my doctoral committee at Montana State University who recognize the need for clarification of these issues in a medium that could be understood by the lay person in both science and theology.
This book addresses many of the factors and much of the data that are pertinent to what has become a serious controversy within the Christian church at large, and has rippled into the classrooms and courtrooms of the broader culture. Specifically, this is a handbook for searching, thoughtful Christians, educators and pastors, young people, parents, students, and seminarians. It should also give insight to public school teachers, school board members, museum personnel, textbook authors and publishers, and other interested parties who find themselves curious about or embroiled in creationism/evolution issues. It targets those who desire to understand how a Christian can hold the evolutionary view yet affirm God as the omnipotent Creator, and it seeks to assist those who sincerely search for resolution to the confusion that surrounds the subjects. …
I am deeply saddened to have witnessed much pain resulting from the division within the Christian world because of the belief disparity that has been nourished by the error of creationists’ belief. Yet I declare my respect for the deep faith and commitment demonstrated by these Christians and warmly include them as my brothers and sisters in the Lord. We have much in common ….
The opposite perspective of creationism is evolutionary naturalism/materialism. The tendency of some scientists to incorporate this atheistic philosophy into their world view and then, knowingly or unknowingly, inappropriately attach it to the science of evolutionary theory is exposed and discussed. This has no doubt interfered with many Christians’ attempts to integrate the scientific basis for evolution with their understanding of biblical teaching. The discipline of evolution is a science, not a philosophy or religion, and I profoundly disagree with scientists who masquerade evolutionary naturalism as philosophy within science.
It is time that the issues are addressed for the common reader: What is science? What is meant by evolutionary theory? What are its claims? What data support it? What are its present enigmas? Is there a basis for “creation science”? Why is it not accepted by most scientists, even those who are avowed Christians? What important questions have creationists not answered? What is evolutionary naturalism or materialism? What is meant by “Intelligent Design”? What are the methods of and bases for scriptural interpretation in modern biblical scholarship? How can the data from biology, geology, and paleontology be integrated into a Christian paradigm? How can one maintain the Christian faith and be honest to Genesis as well as to observable data and the rational theories of modern science?
I am concerned that Christianity has lost respect in general, and from the scientific community in particular, because of this conflict. It is unknown how many searchers have been discouraged from the Christian faith because of it. I also regret the pain that inquiring Christians must endure as they honestly struggle with these issues in their search for truth. Some experience ostracism and the alienating judgment of their peers, and many admit to carefully avoiding discussions on these subjects for fear of consequences. Intellectual bondage is not a hallmark of authentic Christianity.
Along with their devotional Bible study, most pastors and church leaders seek a broad, scholarly foundation in the scriptures. This training is typically received at seminary. Those in authority who guide the laity attempt to understand a very ancient book written in several foreign languages over a period of a thousand years by numerous authors, some known and some unknown. They try to understand its application to the many technical aspects of a question such as evolution. There remain seminaries, Bible schools, and many books and curricula that do not teach a scriptural interpretation that is consistent with the voluminous data of modern evolutionary theory. When pastors are not informed then parishioners cannot become acquainted with the means available to correlate these important disciplines.
For more than a century, mainline Protestant and Catholic seminaries have been teaching a scriptural interpretation that facilitates the integration of evolutionary theory with the biblical creation accounts. Few institutions, however, offered courses that integrate specific subjects of modern science, such as evolutionary theory, with revealed biblical truth although this is definitely improving. An insufficient grasp of these complex subjects may explain why few of their graduates address these issues in their congregations. Possibly they fear the conflict that may ensue as parishioners’ beliefs or means of interpretation are challenged, or the risk involved, which may even endanger their jobs. Time, and other priorities and interests may also explain this omission. …
Pastors may have made valiant attempts to explain evolutionary theory in light of modern biblical interpretation but congregants have not availed themselves of these opportunities. Mainline denominations have published excellent study materials and other literature that are designed for those who inquire in these areas. … There is a need for more scholarly sophistication of biblical interpretation, admittedly a very deep and challenging discipline, in the pews across the denominations, in cathedrals, and in independent churches. …
Intellectual bondage is not a hallmark of authentic Christianity
The good news is that there is compatibility and no cause for concern. There is a marvelous consistency between God’s amazing Word (the Bible) and God’s awesome works (nature).
Science is tentative. It may be demonstrated tomorrow or farther into the future that a wholly different paradigm explains origins and development. For almost a century and a half, however, the vast majority of scientists, including those who are Christians, have seen the data of evolutionary theory to be compellingly persuasive. Furthermore, biblical scholarship over the same period has demonstrated how this body of scientific evidence can be appropriately integrated into the Christian world view. We must continually be open to new information as well as new revelation, being sensitive and honest in assessing how the data gained through modern science relates to the faith.
I was raised in a branch of Christianity where deeply committed Christians modeled Christ’s compassion and self-sacrificial love by positively influencing their world. They were faithful to the scriptures as they understood them. There was a strong indoctrination into what was perceived as truth on various theological issues. Autonomous thinking or consideration of alternative belief positions even on peripheral questions was generally not encouraged. Questioning or entertaining doubts could be perceived as lack of faith so most passively accepted the established biblical interpretations of the elders and leaders. Also, the priority of many of those devout Christians was living the faith and loving in God’s name, and there was less time or inclination to dwell on theological issues.
Even though Genesis 1 and 2 were generally taken literally and most would have called themselves biblical literalists, they did not interpret all of the scriptures literally. For instance, while God was believed to be a spirit they had no trouble with such phrases as “God breathed” in Genesis 2:7 (as though God had muscles and lungs), or “the eye of God” (Deuteronomy 11:12), or “With my outstretched arm I made the Earth” (Jeremiah 27:5). They knew these texts were figurative. It is a beautiful image that Abraham’s descendants were to be as numerous as the stars in the sky and the sand on the seashore, but this cannot be interpreted as a literal promise (Genesis 22:17). Even though Jesus taught “If your right hand offend you, cut it off” (Matthew 5:30), his followers did not do that. Nor did anyone sell all that they had and give to the poor as Jesus instructed an inquiring young man (Matthew 19:21). They knew what Jesus meant when he said “I am the door” (John 10:9) or when the Psalmist (92:15) declared the “Lord is upright. He is my Rock.” These passages were not to be taken literally. They had profound, powerful, theological, figurative messages! The images buried in Daniel and other Old Testament prophets or Revelation were given nonliteral, symbolic meaning. Obviously, not all of the scriptures were to be taken literally. How was it decided that Genesis 1 and 2 had to be interpreted as relating to literal, scientific, historic events and could not have been seen as containing profound theological messages instead?
They are bound and loyal to a tradition rather than a truth
The interpretation of pre-scientific writings that originated thousands of years ago in languages from far and extinct cultures presents considerable challenge, and most beginners employ a literal approach. A degree of instruction is necessary to recognize the Bible as a composite of numerous types of literature, each needing to be interpreted appropriately and some even requiring significant scholarship to be understood. Just as Shakespeare’s play Hamlet is read differently than the poem “Casey at the Bat,” or the fictional story of Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady is interpreted differently than a historical account of World War II, so the prophecies of Ezekiel are read differently than the love poems of the Song of Solomon, the laws of Deuteronomy, the histories of I and II Kings, the parables in the Gospel of Mark, the personal letters of Paul, or the origins stories in Genesis.
High school students routinely need to be instructed in how to read the classics of English literature. Similar formal training is generally required for accurate exegesis (interpretation) of any literature especially if it was written long ago and in a different cultural setting. Many Christians are not acquainted with the scholarship associated with biblical exegesis or do not appreciate that such expertise has value. Some reject it, believing that too much questioning or analysis of the scriptures might be detrimental to the faith. This can result in Christians accepting without question the dogmatic and authoritative interpretations that have been established by their particular wing of the church and they do not consider, nor are they encouraged to consider, the insights of other theologians and biblical scholars. They are bound and loyal to a tradition rather than a truth.
There is something powerful and safe in traditional belief that makes even the consideration of a novel idea almost impossible. However, elevating the teachings and interpretations of former pastors and teachers above their present counterparts can be perceived by some as closemindedness, fear, or even idolatry. Confined thinking that requires conformity to one interpretation which is heralded as “The Truth” leaves no room for personal development and God’s progressive revelation and ongoing activity in the world. As God was introduced to ancient Israel and then unveiled more character through Christ, God has continued to reveal this divine will and work down through the centuries. Besides the insight gained through conscientious and rigorous study of the scriptures, another most profound medium through which this revelation has come is modern science, the careful study of God’s workmanship.
Thinking Christians must be open to considering whether the prescientific accounts of Genesis 1 and 2 might indeed be not just records of literal happenings, but profound and powerful theological theses; revelations from the God of the universe who was beginning to be made known. Those who hold to biblical literalism often express the concern that if some parts of the Bible are not taken literally, then other parts such as their security about salvation and the promises of Jesus are threatened. The good news is that that fear is unfounded. The key is in recognizing the various literary genres and appropriately interpreting them. Truth will prevail.
In the mid 1960s, after earning two degrees in biology, I sought theological training and discovered that the seminaries in my milieu did not accept women. That led to my enrolling at an institution which some labeled “liberal.” I wasn’t in that academic community long before I realized that the mind was recognized as a significant creation of God and its exercise was vigorously encouraged. A disciplined mind, the faculty held, could be used to the glory of God. The Christian faith and the scriptures were seen as strong enough to endure questions and they were not exempt from challenge or doubt. Scholarship within the faith was regarded as honest and profound enhancement, not elevated above faith but integrated into it. I was impressed with the deep spiritual commitment as well as the brilliance and academic humility of the faculty. They were on a search for God’ truth. There was no distinction between the men and the women with respect to their gifts and exercise of them, their opinions and/or means of faith expression. As a young woman, I found it a fertile environment for growth.
Students at that seminary were encouraged to become informed and reflect on all sides of issues and prayerfully and autonomously draw conclusions. That inevitably resulted in some heterogeneity of belief on the peripheral issues of the faith within the student body and alumni, and inclusiveness and tolerance were fostered within the whole community. No one had an edge on truth. This dynamic bred openminded, expectant interaction, and maturity in faith resulted. In an affirming community students honestly assessed their beliefs, sometimes with considerable pain as the need for change was acknowledged and addressed. It was not easy for individuals to recognize and admit that a loving parent, pastor, Sunday school teacher, church, denomination, or they, themselves, were wrong on an issue.
While I knew that those in my religious heritage had taught me much truth, I became aware that their interpretation of the scriptures dealing with women, which led to discrimination against them at seminary, was wrong. They were forgiven, but this realization led me to subject other areas of their biblical interpretation to closer scrutiny. If they didn’t see the need to adapt an ancient literature, which was written in a patriarchal culture, to a modern society, what other areas of oversight might there be? I came to suspect literalism.
I look back on the people and the Christian community in which I was raised with deep affection and gratitude. Their committed, Christ-centered living and enthusiasm for the faith were exemplary. They sincerely tried to please their Lord and I know He will say of them “Well done, good and faithful servants.” I treasure the examples they were to me of costly grace and committed faith and am grateful for the priority they gave to scripture memorization. I yearn at this point for a Christianity that unites this genuine Christ-like living and love for God’s word with the academic rigor and informed scholarship of trained scientists and theologians. I long to see an attitude of tolerance and humility which comes from the unique, inclusive love modeled by our Lord. This would be the best of all worlds. It would enable Christianity to meet the challenges that perpetually arise in a complex, changing, scientific, and highly technical world. Without this mindset, the faith offered by Jesus Christ may be seen as dogmatic, narrow, prideful, divisive, dated, and unattractive or even amusing to those who are educated and acculturated in this scientifically based era.
Another most profound medium through which this revelation has come is modern science
I have taught biology and the college level for over 25 years at institutions varying from a community college to an Ivy League university. Countless students have asked me how I could be a minister’s wife or call myself Christian and believe in evolution. There is much about the subject of evolution and its relationship to the scriptures that is not resolved in many minds. In their attempt to deal with apparent disparity, some Christians have to separate their academic pursuits from their faith, leaving the scientific issues of the week outside the sanctuary door. There is a need for honest dialogue and wholeness. One college student said, “I find it easier to ignore the church as I pursue my major in geology.”
Besides contributing to an integration of the truth of scripture with the truth of modern science, an additional desired outcome of this book is to in some way facilitate unity within the parts of the Christian world that have historically been divided on these questions. Such division disserves our Lord, encouraging conflict and distracting us from the good news, hope, service, and love for the Lord which unites Christians.
It is further hoped that this effort will lead to more careful scholarship, more tolerance for alternative views on peripheral issues, more inclusiveness, and were necessary, courageous belief modification among the people of God. Christians may never be able to agree fully on these issues, but above all we must practice the love, forgiveness, and forbearance that honors our Lord. An “us” and “them” mentality among the people of God is not consistent with Jesus’ teaching “that they all may be one” (John 17:21). We must cease to allow the more peripheral question of how we got here to interfere with the more central questions of why we are here, how we must live, where we are going, whom we serve, and how we respond to God.
“Great is our Lord, and of great power: His understanding is infinite.” Psalm 147:5
