Episode 127: Conclusion: The Beginning of Geology. 19th Century Modern Geology
Science & Religion 101
This course examines the nature of both science and religion and attempts to explore the possible relationships between them. The primary purpose is to dispel the popular myth that science and religion are entrenched in a never-ending conflict. As a result, this course argues that if the limits of both science and religion are respected, then their relationship can be complementary. Topics include: Science and Religion Categories and Foundational Principles, Definitions of Science and Religion, Science-Religion Models and Relationships, Intelligent Design and Natural Revelation, the Galileo Affair, Geology and Noah’s Flood, Evolution and Darwin’s Religious Beliefs, the Modern “Evolution” vs. “Creation” Debate, the Problem of Evil, and Interpretations of the Biblical Accounts of Origins in Genesis 1-11. The course employs a Constructive Teaching Style in order that students can develop their personal views on the relationship between science and religion and on each of the topics listed above. St. Joseph's College is a Catholic, undergraduate, liberal arts college on the University of Alberta campus. It is an independent institution that is affiliated with the University of Alberta.
Geology & the Biblical Flood
Over the 20 years that I have taught this course, I have found that religious students struggle the most with the topic of Noah’s flood in the Bible (Genesis 6-9). The first half of this section is a brief history of geology, beginning with the worldwide flood as the central paradigm and ending with its complete elimination from science. This is another example of science powerfully impacting religion. In the second half, the three basic views of the biblical flood are presented—Global Flood, Local Flood, and Re-Cycled & Re-Interpreted Flood Motif Theory. In particular, the challenging topic of whether or not Noah was a real person in history is explored. We also consider the notion that the biblical flood (Genesis 6-9) is composed of two original sources (Jahwist and Priestly sources).
Episode 117: Key Thoughts. Biblical Texts on the Flood6:11
Episode 118: Biblical Texts on the Flood (Continued) Brief History of Geology & the Biblical Flood4:10
Episode 119: The Early Church & the Flood. Flood Scholarship4:07
Episode 120: Flood Scholarship (Continued). St. Augustine on the Flood4:23
Episode 121: St. Augustine on the Flood (Continued)5:51
Episode 122: The Middle Ages & the Flood. The Early Modern Period & the Flood5:27
Episode 123: The Early Modern Period & the Flood (Continued)4:57
Episode 124: Niels Steensen & Principle of Superposition. Global Flood Theories5:43
Episode 125: The Beginning of Geology. James Hutton & Principle of Actualism4:37
Episode 126: Catastrophism. Adam Sedgwick’s Recantation5:05
Episode 127: Conclusion: The Beginning of Geology. 19th Century Modern Geology4:43
Episode 128: 19th Century Modern Geology (Continued) The Anti-Geologists3:53
Episode 129: 19th Century Modern Geology (Continued) The Harmonizers4:55
Episode 130: Conclusion: Brief History of Geology & the Biblical Flood7:00
Episode 131: What about Noah’s Flood? (1) Global Flood Theory7:37
Episode 132: (2) Local Flood4:19
Episode 133: (3) Re-Cycled & Re-Interpreted Flood Motif Theory5:34
Episode 134: Re-Cycled & Re-Interpreted Flood Motif Theory (Continued)5:28
Episode 135: Origin of the Biblical Flood Account (Gen 6-9)4:39
Episode 136: Evidence for Two Sources in Biblical Flood Account (Gen 6-9)9:24
Episode 137: The BIG Question: Who Was Noah?5:28
Hermeneutics 13B: The Heavens & Ancient Astronomy (Part I). The Firmament8:33
But it's important to note that Sedgewick accepts
a concordist approach to the two divine books.
Sedgwick's position leads us to ask a critical question.
Is there a non-concordist approach to the two divine books?
In other words, is there a hermaneutic for the biblical flood account in
Genesis 6-9 that does not look for scientific and historical facts.
No doubt about it, this is
a challenging question because most Christians are concordists.
But is there another way to understand Noah's flood account?
Let me offer a few conclusions to this subsection,
entitled "The Beginning of Geology."
First and foremost, we have another clear example that science impacts religion.
Around 1700, geologists believed that the global flood explained all stratified rocks.
But, by 1825, the flood had no place in geology.
Is this an example of science destroying religion?
Or, is this a call to re-evaluate the hermeneutics of the biblical flood account?
Conclusion number two, geologists,
at this point in history,
are realizing that the age of the earth is very old,
in the millions of years.
The reason is that a great amount of time is needed for
stratification and the laying down of all the layers in the crust of the earth.
Finally, during this period,
geology is starting to separate away from theology.
In particular, scientific and historical concordism with
the biblical flood is starting to break down.
We will now turn our attention to 19th century modern geology,
between 1825 and 1900.
Charles Lyell is often considered to be the Father of Modern Geology.
His three volume "Principles of Geology," published between 1830 and 1833,
is a landmark in the history of geology.
It's worth noting that Darwin boarded HMS Beagle in 1831 with volume one,
and it had a huge impact on Darwin.
Lyell's famed geological concept is the principle of uniformitarianism.
He recycles Hutton's principle of actualism with a subtle qualification.
Uniformitarianism is explaining the earth's past
through the processes observed on earth today,
using the same forces and same intensities.
The key qualification is using the same forces and same intensities.
It's worth noting that Lyell was a deist and an anti-evolutionist.
In fact, Darwin was scared to tell him about the theory of evolution.
But the point I want to emphasize is that modern geology arose because of evidence in
the earth's crust and not due to the pressure from evolutionary biologists.
Please turn to page 26 in the class handouts.
It's also worth noting the geological mapping and
the geological column were quite refined by 1850.
And it is the basic outline that we have today.
In particular, the geological column was
established before Darwin's famed book on evolution,
"Origin of Species," published in 1859.
Again, I want to point out that the geological map was put
together by 1850 and by anti-evolutionists.
It did not arise through some sort of conspiracy by evolutionists.