The Creationists

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing History of Creationists
Review: A previous reviewer stated that this work focused too much on the "personalities and politics of creationism." However, that is the way the book was intended. It is a history, not so much, of creationism, but of creationists (thus the title of the book). And knowing that, I found it to be an information-laden investigation of the people behind creationism. The book chronicles the rise of creationism following Darwin's discoveries (for the first 50 years after Darwin the move to evolution was so overwhelming that, so it seems, Christianity had no effective response) up until the beginning of the nineties. Though the book does not detail much in the way of creationist "research" it does detail some of the the scientific problems that Old-Earth creationists had with Young-Earth creationism and vice versa. And even though, a previous reviewer wrote that the book is too biased against creationism, it's interesting to note that on the back of the book is a recommendation from Henry M. Morris, one of the biggest names in YEC.

Rating:
Summary: Intriguing History of Creationists
Review: A previous reviewer stated that this work focused too much on the "personalities and politics of creationism." However, that is the way the book was intended. It is a history, not so much, of creationism, but of creationists (thus the title of the book). And knowing that, I found it to be an information-laden investigation of the people behind creationism. The book chronicles the rise of creationism following Darwin's discoveries (for the first 50 years after Darwin the move to evolution was so overwhelming that, so it seems, Christianity had no effective response) up until the beginning of the nineties. Though the book does not detail much in the way of creationist "research" it does detail some of the the scientific problems that Old-Earth creationists had with Young-Earth creationism and vice versa. And even though, a previous reviewer wrote that the book is too biased against creationism, it's interesting to note that on the back of the book is a recommendation from Henry M. Morris, one of the biggest names in YEC.

Rating:
Summary: An enlightening history
Review: I have been reading about the scientific research of the earth's origins interpreted through the worldview of creation for many years now, primarily through the writings of the Institute for Creation Research. In general, I am interested in history and how thoughts and cultural assumptions develop. Since I am also interested in the evolution vs. creation debate, this book was a goldmine for me, learning how Christian scientists responded to Darwin in the nineteenth century, continuing from there all the way up to the time this book was written in the early 1990s. It was fascinating to learn how the response to evolution has changed through the years, not only from scientists, but the book even gives some glimpses into the responses of the laity. Through this book I have learned of some important historical figures in the creationist movement, and of the differing viewpoints of creationists throughout time.

I have been very interested in the political skirmishes in the schools and courts regarding this issue, but these are only mentioned in passing in this book because it's not about the politics of society but about the people who were key in influencing the development of current creationist thinking.

Considering that the author clearly states in the introduction that he does not believe in creation in any kind, the book is quite objective, I think. There wasn't that condescending smirking so often found in the writings of evolutionists when they discuss creationists and creation science. The history was reported quite even-handedly, I think. Some reviewers have claimed that the book is devastating to creationists, but I don't see it as such. If they see it as so devastating, then I think they must not have much knowledge about similar disagreements and politicking that goes on in the secular scientific community. It's amazing how much scientific research results in desired outcomes in order to get more grant money from the government or make the researchers or institution famous. Science is not so pure as some people who want to put it on a pedestal imagine.

While the sentence-by-sentence wording of the book sounds objective, by the time I finished the book I did have a feeling, though, that the important challenges creation science have brought against evolution were largely ignored, giving the implicit impression that creation science is weak and less scientific than evolution science. But this is a minor point, for the book is not really about the comparison of the two branches of study on the origins of the earth and life, but rather a history of the development of creationist thought, and in that regard, I think this book did a splendid job.

Rating:
Summary: A New Edition Seems Appropriate
Review: In 1440, Bishop Nicholas of Cusa of the Roman Church published a book titled On Learned Ignorance. This book and supporting books by Cusa are on the subject of God and a new creation theory. His theory is very different than Moses' Genesis and the three interpretations of the Genesis covered by Numbers. Why didn't Numbers include Cusa's new theory in this book? I speculate that Numbers was unaware of this new creation theory because it became available in the US only in 1979. Further, the title Cusa chose for his major book was not appropriate to modern researchers who use computer search engines daily.

Cusa's theism challenges some Church teaching. For instance, his God is infinite and his creation is finite; the universe has no center; all creatures are images of God; and God, the creation, and the Trinity are eternal. As seen, his creation theory is a major challenge to the evolutionary theory promoted today. Because of his challenges, Cusa's new theory took the slow path to the world book market, but through big personalities such as Galileo. Kepler, Bruno, Leibniz, and Cantor.

Today, the many writings of Cusa are becoming popular on the Internet with the help of the American Cusanus Society. I am writing a modern science book that features Cusa. Hopefully, the author of The Creationists and others take a look at the new creation theory of Cusa.


Rating:
Summary: A biased distortion of creationist history
Review: It is simply a fact to point out that Numbers is an 'apostate' -- the word means someone who has fallen away from his professed faith. Numbers made it clear that used the Yellowstone petrified 'forests' as an excuse to abandon creationism and his professed faith in biblical Christianity. His bias should be noted when reading his book.

One irony is that many uniformitarian scientists now believe that the Yellowstone were not a succession of forests which were buried in situ, but were catastrophically uprooted and transported as a floating log mat, and later the logs sank root-end first into the lake bottom. See the Answers in Genesis site.

Numbers' book majors heavily on personalities, with subtle (and some not-so-subtle) character assassinations, while the high scientific qualifications of many creationists are downplayed. He invariably gives the last word to the evolutionist, which often leaves an impression contrary to the facts as can be seen upon checking the original sources. See also review by Prof. Edgar Andrews, _Origins_ (Journal of the Biblical Creation Society) 8(20):21-23, 1995.

Many atheists and their compromising evangelical lackeys have followed Numbers' ploy of attributing biblical creationism and flood geology to 'the visions of an Adventist prophetess [Ellen White]' via George McCready Price. A number of papers by Dr Terry Mortenson in the _Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal_ show that the early 19th century Scriptural Geologists presented such ideas well before Price. And the founder of Answers in Genesis (USA), Ken Ham, pointed out that he had never even heard of Price at the time he founded CSF/AiG, and that he adopted creationism because of the biblical teaching.

Even Henry Morris's naive off-the-cuff "endorsement" of this book can't change the incontrovertable FACTS of history: that YEC was the historic view of the Christian Church from LONG before Ellen White -- Basil the Great, Martin Luther and John Calvin all believed in 6 literal days, and even allegorisers like Origen and Augustine furiously denounced pagan ideas that claimed the earth was older than 6-10 thousand year.

Note that even if Numbers were right about Price, he and all those whon gleefully parrot him are wrong to think that discrediting Price is enough to refute creationism -- this is a classic case of the genetic fallacy.

One useful thing in his book is that he exposes the 'strained efforts' of re-interpreting Scripture to fit evolution, and the deceit of some theistic evolutionary college professors '[s]tretching the truth to the breaking point' (p. 182) when trying to hide what they really believed from conservative parents and donors.

Rating:
Summary: A better way to kill creationism
Review: Ronald L. Numbers has done a great service to those of us who long to see the death of young-earth creationism. By tracing the history of the movement, he has shown that young-earth creationism arose out of the 7th Day Adventist church, not out of orthodox Christianity. (The fact that YEC leader Henry Morris endorsed this book should silence any canard from YECs that Augustine, Luther, or Calvin endorsed their views.) YEC is not accepted by any major evangelical college or institution. This fact alone should end the mis-association of young earthism with "evangelical Christianity" that is promoted by the media and anti-Christian writers.

Young-earthism can't be defeated by science, since its adherents reject science out of hand. It must be slain by the Bible and sound theology. The best way to start YEC's demise is to broadcast as broadly as possible the TRUE history of YEC - that is a 7th Day Adventist invention that fobbed off on orthodox Christian churches during a time of cultural confusion and decline, and that it displaced the orthodox Christian belief in a "day-age" interpretation of Genesis. Another point is that YEC is akin to "open theism" in its interpretation of the Bible, proving the sheer ludicrousness of an ultra-literal hermenuetic. While commentators fume about the continued resilience of creationism, the truth is that Intelligent Design and a resurgent Old Earthism have drastically weakened YEC's support in its own base. I think that we are nearing the time when a direct, theologically-informed assault on the ICR and other creationist bodies by Bible-believing Christians will break the back of young-earth creationism and restore Old Earthism to its proper standing. Numbers has given us a good place to start.

Rating:
Summary: The best historical overview of creationism available today
Review: The point that many reviewers seem to miss is that this is the work of an historian, not someone that wishes to engage actively in the debate (such as it is). Hence the emphasis on the politics and personalities that shaped scientific creationism. Numbers succeeds admirably in decribing the many disagreements within the several creationist movements, and its problematic relation with mainstream science. Having edited an important source publication on the subject, hardly anyone is more qualified to pass judgment on the creationist movement than Numbers, but he remains careful not to get entangled, which is not always easy. If you think the book is too much anti- this or pro- that, let that be your loss, because you will never appreciate the fascinating history of one of the more enigmatic popular culture movements of recent time.

Rating:
Summary: A better way to kill creationism
Review: This book, leaves out many of the scientific views of the Creationsist, I want to show a simple axample of this. Now we have never been able to make a "simple cell' as the evolutionists call it" even with all of our technology today. The "simple cell" is actullaly more complex than our most complex inventions (space ship) yet they say it came about by accident. How can this be? I think it is clear the Evolution is a fairytale from long ago and far away! Think! What is more logical? Time+matter+chance=organizationn or
Time+matter+CONCEPT=organization? The latter happens every day, but we have never observed the first. Thus the creation view is scientific, and the Evolution view is not. ...

Rating:
Summary: The Personalities and Politics Behind Creationism
Review: This is a well-researched, well-written and reasonably unbiased survey of the personalities and power behind the creationist movement of the latter 20th Century. Numbers provides an excellent resource that helps us understand the motivations of what is, in the end, a POLITICAL movement (not a scientific movement - there is no science to creation 'science'). It's amazing that I see reviews of this book that complain about how it concentrates too much on personalities and politics, but that and religious motivation (particularly American christian fundamentalism) are what creationism is all about. This book is an outstanding resource for anyone interested in the subject of creationism, the major creationist players, and their war against science and reason. Highly recommended!

Rating:
Summary: An Objective History of Scientific Creationism
Review: This is an astonishingly evenhanded, objective history of the scientific creationist movement. As Numbers points out, this is one of those areas where it seems very difficult to carry on a rational discussion.

Despite how many fundamentalist creationists and humanists view the controversies over creation and evolution, the issue is not either a simple religion vs. humanism or religion vs. science struggle. As the author points out,

"Rather than finding clerics arrayed in simple opposition to scientists, we discover conflicts of a different sort: psychological, as creationists struggled to reconcile the apparently conflicting claims of science and Scripture; and social, as they quarreled with one another over competing scientific and biblical interpretations or contested the boundaries of science and religion with evolutionists in courthouses, legislative halls, and school-board rooms." (p. 10)

And, despite the ad hominem arguments employed by some earlier customer reviews, that is what Numbers deals with in an objective, historical fashion. He seldom betrays his own sympathies, and has received compliments from eminent creationists as well as historians and scientists.

It is eminently clear that the creationists have never been able to agree on their interpretations of the first creation story in Genesis. These disagreements between the young earth and old earth creationists are delineated in great detail. From my point of view, I should also point out that they do not agree with competent biblical scholars, either, who will place Genesis in the cultural context of the ancient Middle East. The first creation story in Genesis is fairly obviously a religious counterstatement to other ancient myths, not a scientific treatise. Besides the second creation story in Genesis, there are at least three other major ones, and a host of other creations texts generally ignored, which have quite different concepts of creation.

One of the main difficulties the creationists have faced is the lack of credible scientific support for their views. In the Arkansas trial, for example, the defendants could produce no peer reviewed articles in scientific journals which supported them; moreover, they had not even written any which they had tried to have published in such journals.

Of course, the scientists opposing creationishm in the schools also had their own political agenda, to compete for scarce resources to fund research. As I said, Numbers is quite even handed.

For anyone interested in the origins and development of old and young earth creationism, the creationist societies and their internal conflicts, and the attempts to introduce so-called creation science into the public school classrooms, this gives a detailed overview.

Creationists may find this book a useful resource to examine the background of their beliefs. For others, it will enable them to see better what the various varieties of creationists believe and why. For myself, I have engaged creationists in the letters to the local newspaper, taking issue with them with some sucess on mainly religious grounds, this book has enabled me to better understand where my antagonists are coming from. And as you can see from other reviews, some of them certainly are antagonistic.