1. discuss the theistic critique of Darwinism offered by old and young earth creationists. In your answer, address the day age and gap theories, flood geology and creation science. Describe how this opposition to Darwinism evolution found expression in the following legal settings: 1925 scopes trial and the arkansas and louisiana “balanced treatment” laws (1982 McLeon v. Arkansas Board of Education, 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard.) On what grounds was each case decided

   • critique from old earth creationists:

   • critique from young earth creationists:
     • early believers didn’t think earth was old enough for evolution to occur
     • later groups strongly believe creation happened in 7 days

• day age theory: explains that in Gen 1-2, a day was not the same as the 24 hr period we experience today (God’s days seen as vast ages)
• gap theories: believes that in between the days of creation described in Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, there were large pauses or gaps in time between the initial creation and Adam and Eve
• flood geology: fossil records show proof that there was a biblical flood, and life on earth is no more than 6000 years old
• creation science: the renaming of “flood geology” in order to gain a platform for teachings in public school classrooms and scientific respectability in the 70s. direct biblical references removed.

scopes trial: TN state law banned evolution teaching in school, substitute teacher said to have taught in class, went on to convict Scopes for teaching evolution in class. Prosecutor died 5 days after ruling, and case was overturned a year later

balanced treatment laws: laws that recognized creation science as religious teachings rather than science teachings. Seen as unconstitutional, and put teaching evolution and teaching creation science on similar playing fields in public school settings.

1. Analyze and evaluate Peacocke’s claim to have crafted a view of divine action that is compatible with the findings of contemporary science and faithful to the fundamental tenents of his religious heritage. In your answer, consider the following questions:

what reflections about God’s actions as Creator and relation to the world does peacocke pair with the following observations about biological evolution?

1. continuity and emergence in biological evolution
   1. God is continuously creating in and through natural processes, living God
2. biological evolution proceeds naturally
   1. no need to look for God as a kind of factor supplementing te creative processes of the world who’s existence was given by God himself
3. creative interplay of law and chance that makes possible an ordered universe capable of developing within itself new modes of existence
   1. if there was only law, nothing new would appear, but if there was only chance, no continuous identity identity and could not rationally analyze. need both to govern world
   2. god is source of law and chance, intentionally written in potentialities, takes risks through chance
4. biological evolution manifests significant trends (propensities that are inherently built into an evolutionary process based on natural selection of the best procreators): increase in complexity; information processing and storage ability; consciousness; sensitivity to pain; self consciousness and language
   1. God isn’t seen as micromanager, and even though there may be rules operating the environment, and direction of divine purpose, there is not a deterministic plan made in advance with details
5. biological evolution is costly, involving pain, suffering, predation and death
   1. pain and suffering are necessary conditions for survival, and can be proposed that God willingly suffers with and under the processes he’s created (suffering servant messiah)

how does peacocke address the issue of theodicy (the vindication of divine justice in the face of the existence of evil?)