James L. Hayward, Dinosaurs, Volcanoes, and Holy Writ: A Boy-Turned-Scientist Journeys from Fundamentalism to Faith (Eugene, OR: Resource), 236 pp., USD 26.00

In this book (hereafter The Journey), James L. Hayward, retired biology professor, presents his argument against the “fundamentalist” faith of his childhood and for theistic evolution.¹ The Journey describes the author’s “fundamentalist” roots in chapters 1–4. Chapters 5–7 describe some issues for which his background had left him unprepared. The central argument is given in chapters 8–13. Chapter 14 concludes The Journey with Hayward’s reasons for choosing to believe in a “larger reality” (p. 193), in contrast to friends who have chosen atheism.

The Journey is skillfully written and interspersed with interesting stories. The book makes some important points worth pondering, especially by those who disagree with its conclusions. One lesson is that disagreeable, unloving believers may do great harm (pp. 20–22). Another is that sincere seekers may be turned away by well-meaning yet misinformed people who make exaggerated or untrue claims (pp. 29–32, 40). A third lesson is that beliefs should be accompanied by positive action (pp. 48, 82, 107).

The Journey shows that too many students leave our schools and churches unprepared to deal with evolutionary thinking (chap. 5), and that teachers and mentors have a strong influence (pp. 59–63), and therefore also have a greater responsibility (cf. Jas 3:1). I came away with the impression that unpleasant experiences with overbearing or pompous believers, in contrast with friendly encounters with people holding long-age views, played a crucial role in turning the author away from his “fundamentalist” roots.

The Argument

Briefly, the argument presented in The Journey consists of three premises:

1. The Bible is not intended to teach us about physical reality (pp. 109, 119). Rather than being “God’s Word,” the Bible “consists of writings by people who, like me, were searching for meaning and a better understanding of reality and the sacred” (p. 118).

2. Geological evidence points to the reality of Deep Time (chaps. 9–11).

3. Fossil and genetic evidence point to common ancestry through evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life (chaps. 11–13).

The logical conclusion from these three premises is that the biblical history of a six-day creation and global flood is false (pp. 109, 113, 200).

As I considered the argument, I was struck by the parallels with another well-known argument recorded in Genesis 3:1–6. First, God’s Word is questioned, then physical evidence is presented that appears to contradict God’s Word, then the conclusion is drawn that God’s Word is untrue. The similarity of the arguments was surely unintended, but should alert the reader to the implications of the claims of The Journey.

Problems with the Premises

The first premise—that the Old Testament is not “meanttoconveyfactsabouthistoryandscience”(p. 109) —is falsified by the many biblical appeals to consider God’s actions in the past (e.g., Deut 6; 1 Chr 16; Pss 78, 106) and the abundant references to creation.²

The theory of common descent by natural selection (the third premise) has too many scientific problems to discuss them all here, but the inadequacy of random mutations for driving evolution has been shown mathematically,³ and the creative power of natural selection has come under increasing skepticism among biologists.⁴ Evolution can truly be called a theory in crisis.⁵

Claims of Deep Time (the second premise) can also be questioned. The sediments have some features that seem inconsistent with Deep Time. Layering of sediments occurs when rates of deposition exceed rates of mixing by burrowing animals. Mixing may occur in a few hours,⁶ suggesting that thick stacks of layered sediments do not represent long periods of time. Exposed land normally experiences either deposition, producing a layer, or erosion, producing an irregular surface. “Flat gaps,” where layers are absent with no evidence of erosion, suggest the time represented by the missing layers never happened.⁷

Fossils also have features that question Deep Time. Fossils often contain preserved biomolecules thought to decay in a relatively short time, a discovery that has faced resistance from some geologists.⁸ The abundance of fossils and the preservation of organisms lacking hard tissues point to rapid geological activity. Lack of change (stasis) of fossil species through their stratigraphic range seems difficult to explain in comparison with rapid change often observed in living species.⁹

Some evidence once urged as evidence for Deep Time has been reinterpreted as not needing so much time. These include the Yellowstone Fossil Forests,¹⁰ time for formation of mineral crystals,¹¹ and plate tectonics.¹² Computer simulations have shown the plausibility of catastrophic plate tectonics by runaway subduction. Heat dispersal remains an issue, but this research shows that alternatives can be proposed and studied scientifically.

Extraterrestrial impact craters, massive volcanic outpourings, and widespread sedimentary layers show that the past was different from the present. These are commonly interpreted as isolated incidents separated by long ages of relative calm, but an alternative view is that they are events separated by days or weeks during the extraordinary global catastrophe recorded in Genesis 7 and 8. This remains an interesting model for research by those willing to consider it.

This is not to claim that one can infer a complete biblical history directly from physical data. The intentions and actions of an intelligent Agent are not deducible from natural laws. Unanswered questions, such as various methods of dating, should be matters for further study, not used as reasons for abandoning faith in Scripture.

Theological Costs

Each of the premises of The Journey’s argument is based on the presupposition that ultimate truth is best discovered by human effort, not by divine revelation. Instead of using Scripture as a guide to understanding reality, The Journey advocates “a perspective that is more in line with the history of life proposed by the majority of the scientific community” (p. 160)—that is, evolution (pp. 186–187). There may be room for God, although it seems He is not active in nature (p. 178) and we cannot know much about Him (p. 200). Indeed, it is unclear whether the “God” of The Journey is a personal God or merely an “essence beyond” (p. 200).

This approach entails enormous scientific, theological, and philosophical costs. The theological costs start with Genesis 1 and continue through Revelation 22. The most significant victim of theistic evolution is the gospel. If living organisms appeared in succession across long ages of time, the biblical story of creation in six days is given up. Abandoning the story of Adam and Eve, and the fall with death as its result, leaves the redeeming sacrifice of Christ without its biblical foundation. One can, of course, make up one’s own story of redemption, but such “just-so” stories have no basis in either science or Scripture.

Another major casualty of the approach of The Journey is the character of God. The Journey is deeply concerned about the problem of evil (pp. 64, 110–111, 162, 168–170, 179–185)and rightlyso. Explainingnatural evils such as suffering and death as necessary for evolution (pp. 165–167) supposedly “lets God off the hook” (p. 185). However, this approach is inextricably trapped in a dilemma between theologically catastrophic alternatives over the purported relationship between God and evolution.

If God directs evolution, then He is the direct cause of suffering, death, and other evils, as Charles Darwin points out.¹³ If God merely watches evolution unfold, He is still responsible for the evil He could have prevented. If He is too impotent to prevent evil, then He is not God; if He is indifferent, then He is part of the problem. None of these ideas are supported by science or the Bible. Instead of “letting God off the hook,” theistic evolution impales Him on the hook.

Unfortunately, The Journey does not recognize the existence of a personal devil (pp. 169–170, 185). Thus, there is no one to blame except God, or “nature.” A far better response to the problem of evil is presented in Scripture (Gen 1–3; Isa 14; Ezek 28; Matt 4; Luke 10:18; John 12:31; Rom 5; Rev 12, 20; etc.).¹⁴

Theistic evolution entails other serious theological costs, including the reliability of the Bible (pp. 109, 119), the “Jewish Sabbath” (p. xiv), God’s providence (p. 162), and presumably foreknowledge and numerous other biblical teachings.¹⁵ Even many who accept Deep Time find fault with the notion that evolution and God are compatible.¹⁶ In summary, the theological costs are “astronomical.”

Given the high theological costs of theistic evolution and the possibility of interpreting nature differently,¹⁷ there is not sufficient basis for rejecting the biblical record of earth’s history. Although unanswered questions remain, experience encourages us to continue to explore nature in the context of God’s Word, confident that He will guide our efforts.

A Choice of Destinations

In reading The Journey, I was reminded of an experience I had when flying to Ontario, California in the United States. As we disembarked, a distraught fellow passenger with a French accent approached one of the flight attendants and pled, “This is Ontario, Canada, isn’t it?” The Journey portrays the path away from “fundamentalism” as a correction of a wrong understanding of origins. Yet, the possibility remains that this is the very path that leads to a confusion of destination.

"As clearly as human beings have been taught by the experience of six thousand years, that death is their common lot, so clearly are we taught by the word of God, and by some notable exhibitions of divine power, that all who have gone into their graves shall come forth again to life."

Uriah Smith, Here and Hereafter (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1897), 221.