This independent study thesis is an analysis of the discourse between science and religion, specifically that of the geology and Christianity. A major part of this analysis covers the different components involved in this discourse. In the first part of this study, the historical development, or evolution, of creationism in America is explored. Part two of this study using geologic fieldwork in England and a literature review, will test the scientific validity of scientific creationism by comparing it to the geology of the Purbeck Formation (Jurassic). Finally, part three comments on the ability of several models to provide sufficient common ground between Christianity and Theory of evolution. Why should common ground be sought? Because both science and religion exist to serve a purpose in humanity, so they must be capable of identifying with one another and interacting. It is also the intent of this paper to show that the interaction between science and religion that is proposed by scientific creationism is poor. In light of the failure of scientific creationism to provide sufficient common ground, other models of compromise are examined. This paper concludes that the best current model for positive compromise is the nonoverlapping magisteria model, developed by Stephen J. Gould, paired with an application of theistic evolution. This conclusion recognizes distinct magisteria of science and religion, and provides an application from which individuals can choose to allow those magisteria to interact.
Wilson, Mark A.
Kammer, III, Charles L.
Religious Studies; Geology
Poole, Richard W., "Scientific Evidence and Theological Arguments For the Failure of Scientific Creationism to Provide Sufficient Common Ground Between Theory of Evolution and Christianity" (2003). Senior Independent Study Theses. Paper 4074.
Bachelor of Arts
Senior Independent Study Thesis
© Copyright 2003 Richard W. Poole