The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1884-10-15
CORRESPONDEN NOE.
Columbia Theological Seminary.

CO1un Ola IneOlOSlcd1 OeInlIldIy.
A minority, in the Board of Directors
of Columbia Seminary, voted to forbid
Prof Woodrow from teaching what he
calls "the doctrine of Evolution" espe-
cially that the body of Adam was pro
baby evolved from lower animals. As
one of the minority let me present some
thoughts on this subject, for it will soon
come before the Synods controlling the
Seminary.
The Question.
The minority did not cherge the Per-
kins Professor with infdelity nor with
heresy; and they did not even ask the
Board to- request his resignation. They
put all personal matters aside, that at
.tention might be directed to the great
question at issue, viz Shall the doctrine
of Evolution" and the view that Adam
body was probably derived from ances-
tors unlike himself, be taught in our
Seminary?
The minority said, There are twenty
things that the Professor may teach, but
there are two things that he must not
teach" The majority virtually said
$50 on, Professor, and teach those two
things, if you wish and any other scien-
tifc hypothesis that you desire Against
this the minority protested, and these are
Some of Our Reasons.
l. Evolution is an improved hypoth-
esis"
Such is the testimony of almost every
leading Christian scientist. Many even
regard it as false science, especially in It's
application to man.
Quatrefages, the leading anthrcpologist
of France, says Let them show us q
single instance of the transmutation OF
one species into another"
Sir VIM. Thomson, prince among sci
entists, thus testifes, THAT man could be
thus evolved out of the inferior animals,
he looked upon as the widest dream OF
materialism; pure assumption which
offended him alike by its arrogance and
folly"
II Science refuses Evolution seat in
her temple, shall it be enthroned in the
"school of the prophets by the Church
OF Christ?
2 belief in Evolution affects the in
depreciation of many passages of Scrip
ture."
e. g. The phrases after his kind" and
"after their kind" in Gen. l. IL, 25, are
interpreted as teaching the fxity OF spe-
cies. Evolution says they do not teach
that, but does not say what they do teach.
1t takes away our bread and gives us a
stone 1t makes these parts of the ora
cles of God to be dumb The hypothesis
of non.contradction is almighty, and
with authority forbids the Lord from
affirming single scientific fact in His
own word. 1t says to Jehovah, Be still
upon this point, and know that am
God"
3. "The view that Adams body was
evolved from lower animals, and not
formed by supernatural act of God is
dangerous and hurtful."
Dangerous to young theologians whose
minds are in formative condition, is the
speculation that Adams body was born.
and born Of brute. If the Professor
can explain, (or rather explain away the
words the Lord God formed man Of the
dust Of the ground, to suit his queer
hypothesis, then what will not some Of
his students do2 "If they do these things
in green tree, what shall be done in the
dry2"
Hbrtf,lL to our church membership.
Teach this, and then upon what interpre-
tation can our people rely If the phrase
God created" may mean born Of a
beast" and the phrase "dust of the
ground" may mean 1.-The body Of an ape"