A Case For Evolutionary

Creationism
By Christian Anarchist

I wish to make something clear and I mean

very clear with the introduction to this essay. I
am not here to state that my position on this is
the only one which should be accepted as some
fact that nobody can refute. I am only making
this essay to provide information as it pertains to
this particular question: Can a Christian
believe in evolution?
Though I have been known to get involved
with controversy on YouTube over topics, like
how I am a Calvinist and the recent Flat Earth
Christian Movement that I had addressed in a

few videos of mine and even came across a

follower of this movement in a debate, this topic
is probably very controversial since not only are
we dealing with the concept of Gods creative
process, but we are dealing with Adam and Eve,
Original Sin and Biblical Literacy as well as
Biblical Inerrancy. So we will try to go over as
much information pertaining to this topic in
regard to the opening chapters of Genesis and a
select set of biblical passages from a theological
perspective only. I am a man who is more
interested in Sola Scripture and therefore do not
desire to engage in the realm of science since
with regards to science, your worldview is what
interprets the evidence.

1. Exploring Genesis 1 & 2

In the beginning God created the heaven

and the earth. These are the mighty starting
words of one of the most telling books in the
Old Testament. However, when we begin to
look more into these two chapters we start to
notice some things that would make us as 21st
Century Americans question what we are
looking at. This is also one of the things that
cause somebody to be skeptical about
Christianity and its claims on certain topics.
A nice example to notice on the first hand is
that if you read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2
concerning the creation of Adam, the order is
reversed. First off, we have Genesis 1:26-27
where God says he creates Adam AND Eve.
And God said, Let us make man in our image,
after our likeness: and let them have dominion
over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the
air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth,
and over every creeping thing that creepeth
upon the earth. So God created man in his own

image, in the image of God created he him;

male and female created he them. Before we
move on to Genesis 2, if you read your bible,
some of the verses before Genesis 1:26-27
describe other animals coming into existence
before Adam and Eve. Plus, it also says that
Adam and Eve were made on the same day. So
the creation of animals, fish, insects and humans
in total took six whole days.
Now let us observe a text in Genesis 2:7
where it says the following: And the Lord God
formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and
man became a living soul. So we have man
(Adam) being formed from the ground and is
given a life and a soul. You may be asking what
exactly am I trying to point out here. Let us take
a look at a couple of future verses in the chapter
after verse seven:

Genesis 2:9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow
every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the
tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of
knowledge of good and evil.
&
Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed every
beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them
unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever
Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

When you look back at Genesis 1 from a

plain reading of the text, you might think
Genesis 2:9 would contradict Genesis 1:11-13
and Genesis 2:19 would contradict Genesis
1:20-25. If you havent figured out why they
would seem like they contradict each other ((not
that I am indicating there is a contradiction in
the text), it is relation to their creation day
assignment. In Genesis 2:7-19, it appears as if

the herbs, trees, animals and insects are all

created on the same day after Adam is created.
We should note however that in Genesis 1,
Adam wasnt made until day SIX of the creation
process as perceived in the literal plain reading.
So it took God until day SIX in Genesis 1 for
Adam and Eve to be made.
Another thing that you might have noticed,
if you were with me earlier, is that Genesis 2:19
says that the beasts of the field (land animals)
and the fowl of the air (flying creatures) were
made exactly together on the same day when
Genesis 1:20-23 says that the fowl of the air and
the fish were made on the fifth day. It then
becomes day six when God creates the beasts of
the field in Genesis 1:24-25. So with this in
mind, we need to be aware that a plain reading
of the text will not suffice alone.
Frank Polak, a member of the Hebrew
Culture Studies department at Tel Aviv
University, has written an article entitled,

Poetic style and parallelism in the creation

account (Genesis 1.1-2.3), where he writes
about the poetic style and parallelism with the
first chapter of Genesis (mainly saying that
Genesis 1 is a good candidate to fall under the
category of a certain type of poetry.) In his
article, he helps us define what would help us to
define the poetry in Genesis 1:
Characterization of a text as poetic should be
based on external and internal attributes alike.
From the point of view of content and
expressive power, a text should be viewed as
poetic if the qualities of its language evoke an
image that is too grand and too strong to be
expressed by casual or expository discourse.
From the formal point of view, the distinctive
feature of poetic language is its prosody, while
its informal hallmark is the use of metaphor,
imagery and a particular lexical and
grammatical register (1). He even adds to say,
The creation account is pre-eminently

dominated by a number of formal poetic

elements, in the lexical and grammatical
register, as well as in prosody.
So how can we identify where this particular
poetry lies? Well I would first off recommend
people to read Polaks article on the issue if you
want a full in depth look. Based on what I have
understood from Polaks source, the three main
patterns for poetry that are used would be
parallelism, poetic imagery and repetition. Let
us first start with the parallelism. There is
almost a big coincidence that the first three days
share an interesting parallelism with the other
three days. This parallelism is the inhabitation
(days 1-3) and the creatures that fill the
habitation (days 4-6). This model should help to
easily explain the parallel idea.

So while we have dealt with that, now lets

look for repetition. If you look at the 6 days of
creation, youll notice a common trend of words
used in EVERY day of the creation account in
Genesis 1. Here are the phrases: And God
said/ let there be / God saw that it was
good / And there was evening and morning
the ? day. This again proves that there is reason

to suspect a form of poetic language and style

being implied within the Hebrew text.
Now what about the Poetic Imagery in
Genesis 1? Well in one YouTube video I saw
that was referencing to Frank Polaks work, the
individual pointed out that the second and third
verse would offer the idea that is similar to what
we can see in a Shakespearean sonnet (2). The
idea of darkness being on the face of the deep,
followed by God saying let there be light and
there was light. An example from Shakespeare
using this style is from Romeo and Juliet where
Romeo is admiring Juliets beauty and
describing it:
O, she doth teach the torches to burn bright!
It seems she hangs upon the cheek of night.
Like a rich jewel in an Ethiopes ear; (3)

According to a website that deals with this

particular literary device known as a
juxtaposition, this is what we are dealing with:
Here, the radiant face of Juliet is juxtaposed
with a black Africans dark skin. Romeo admires
Juliet by saying that her face seems brighter
than brightly lit torches in the hall. He says that
at night her face glows like a bright jewel that
shines against the dark skin of an African (4).
So what we are dealing with here is most
likely a poem of Creation. However, one thing
that must be stated about Genesis 2 is the fact
that Genesis 1 can still tell some truth to it in the
same way the Psalms tell truth about what
happened with David. However, the language
isnt to be literal all the time. If you want to see
an example of an event in the bible with a
similar type of double account that Genesis 1
and 2 share, look up Judges 4 and 5 concerning
a battle that took place. Judges 4 deals with the
historical account, but Judges 5 deals with some

new things that happened that wasnt in Judges

4 (which are either seen as literal or poetic
depending on the language). That is some
information to think about concerning the first
two chapters.

2. Adam and Eve

The main problem that the creationist that
believes in the compatibility of evolution with
creation must deal with, is simply that he must
reconcile who Adam and Eve were in the
depiction of creation. There are some who
declare these two figures didnt exist while
proclaiming to be Christians. While I think there
are ways that one can believe in doctrinal
essentials and still be saved while denying a
literal Adam and Eve, this is a view that I

myself do not hold to since I view Adam and

Eve as historical figures who actually existed
for a good reason. However, there is something
important to consider when it comes to what
role Adam and Eve play a role in the Bible.
One thing to notice and observe is that in
Genesis 2:21-25, we see language that indicates
God has established the equality of Adam and
Eve as a pair when it comes to men and women
in the bible. It shows they are not only created
by the same God, but that they are the same
creature. They are both human beings. Both
made in the image of God. We see this in verse
21 where Adam is put to sleep and God decided
to make Eve from Adams rib. He couldve
made it from anywhere else, but he had to
choose the rib. Why would this be? It is because
Eve is to be treated equally. Not treated like the
lowest of the low (for she would have to be
made from somewhere below Adams waist) or
worshipped as the highest of the high (for she

would have to be made from somewhere above

Adams stomach.) However, she is made from
the rib, where it is in the middle to indicate her
equality with Adam.
While there are other views such as the idea
that Adam and Eve were ancient farmers that
grew from the evolutionary process or that they
were just metaphorical names for Man and
Woman to be fictional representatives in a story,
I hold to the idea that they actually existed. Yet
these other beliefs, in my honest opinion as a
believer of the bible, do not seem to indicate
you are a damnable heretic. This is why I do not
like the extremist behavior that aims more for a
Young Earth Creationist perspective instead of
Old Earth or Evolutionary Creationism as
another option. Now to move onto the
Theological Messaging principle.

3. Theological Messaging

God is quite wonderful for his divine word

to be inspired in works of more than just one
genre of material. He allows his material to be
inspired in books of poetry to prose (Job,
Psalms and Proverbs). So whats the purpose if
these particular things arent meant to be taken
literally in the certain books of the bible? A
concept that we have for this is entitled by Dr.
Michael S. Heiser as Theological Messaging,
but people like Denis O. Lamoureux call it the
Message-Incident Principle. I personally prefer
former concerning the term, which is why this
section will be entitled Theological
Messaging. The concepts all eventually boil
down to the idea that the Message that one
wants to get out needed to give somebody in
some method (or as Lamoureux calls it, the
Incident.)

Denis Lamoureux once explained this

concept in an interview with BioLogos once
where this was his reply to a particular question
was was: ..The Message-Incident Principle
is restricted to statements about the physical
world as understood by an ancient science and
conceived through an ancient
phenomenological perspective (5). Based on
this principle, in order for God to relay a serious
truth to certain people in a particular time and
culture, He would take advantage of what they
understood of science back then (an example
that hair length played a role in a womans
fertility), so he would relay the theological truth
in a way they can understand.
A classic example of this is the verses that
flat-earthers use to prove or claim that the Bible
teaches a flat earth. However, when you notice
the surrounding context, its usually in means to
recognize Gods sovereignty or to reveal biblical
prophecy concerning the end times. So in

conclusion from what we can take from Genesis

1 and maybe (note its maybe from Genesis 2)
we can take it as a theological messaging to
prove we came from ONE creator and we need
to acknowledge and give him the credit as being
the creator over his creation.

4. Day, Evening and Morning

This is probably one of the cores of the issue
when it comes to what it means for not just the
debate of Evolution and Christianity, but also
the age of the Earth. What does the Hebrew
word yom mean? What about the evening and
morning formula in each of the 6 days
mentioned? These are both questions that the
Evolutionary Creationist (or Old Earth
Creationist for that matter) must deal with in

order to show any form of foundation or

consistency in their worldview as it regards to
the bible and Sola Scriptura. In a future section
regarding the Early Church, we will touch more
on this issue there.
First let us approach the issue of Yom
(H3117), since it could mean anything from the
following: a day, daytime, week, month, year,
decade, century or long period of time. The
main concept of what is going on in Yom when
you look at any Hebrew lexicon concerning the
word, is that its a general length of time. Old
Testament scholar William Wilson explains that
as Yom is frequently put for a time in general,
or for a long time; a whole period under
consideration Day [YOM] is also put for a
particular season or time when any
extraordinary event happens (6). So
concerning the main concept of what we see in
the Hebrew, Yom is just referring to a certain
period of time in general.

But what about certain passages that seem to

equate them as six days in a work week? Some
of these passages we will go over in the New
Testament section I have reserved. However, we
will examine one passage for the time being.
Exodus 20:9-11 have stated the creation was
made in six days and God rested on the seventh.
However, an interesting thing to note is that this
does not prove anything by comparing the
creation days to our weekdays. Gleason L.
Archer is an Old Testament and Semitic scholar
who also was one of the original fifty translators
on the NASB Bible in 1971 (while also working
on the NIV Bible in 1978). On this exact issue,
he states the following: By no means does this
demonstrate that 24-hour intervals were
involved in the first six days, any more than
the eight-day celebration of the Feast of
Tabernacles proves that the wilderness
wanderings under Moses occupied only eight
days (7).

Now let us observe the following phrase:

evening and morning. This is the part that the
Young Earth stance uses to indicate that these
days were literally twenty four hour days. One
thing I need to note also is why the order is in
reverse from evening and morning. This is
something I personally cannot answer why it is
so at the moment due to my finite knowledge at
this point, but I am still learning like I am with
everything. So we have the words in Hebrew
being ereb (H6153) and boqer (H1242) in this
phrase to deal with. In the Wycliffe Bible
Commentary, forty-eight leading bible scholars
explore and comment on the biblical passages.
Concerning this particular evening and morning
formula, the commentary states this: These are
not ordinary days bounded by minutes and
hours, but days of GodThe beginning of each
act of creation is called morning, and the close
of that specific divine act is called evening (8).
Gleason L. Archer also makes it a point to

explain the formula: Concerning the recurring

[evening and morning] formula at the end of
each creative daythere were definite and
distinct stages in Gods creational procedureit
serves as no real evidence for a literal twentyfour-hour day concept on the part of the biblical
author (9). Even C. John Collins, a professor
of Old Testament at Covenant Theological
Seminary, even states that the following on the
24 hour day formula: Logically, this is
nonsense [since] a day must describe 24 hours
or at least a period of daylight (10). He is of
course referring to the concept that the sun,
moon and stars were not created until day four
of the creation days in Genesis. So simply put,
the idea of evening/morning has historically
been understood as the concept of either
chaos/order or a beginning/ending to something.
Another thing to note before we move on is that
for the seventh day, we dont have the and
there was evening and morning, the seventh

day in the text. So its possible to say that this

seventh day is still going. However, it would be
more consistent if we go with this day as being a
long period of time as opposed to a twenty-four
hour period day.

5. Exploring The New

Testament
We explored the Old Testament on the
creation days, but now it is time we explore the
New Testament on one matter of this topic. So
concerning the Old Testament evidence we
provided, wed have to accept that the New
Testament authors would also read the Old
Testament in the same type of light that the Jews
at the time of Jesus did concerning the Old

Testament. So this deals with one question: Was

there physical death before the fall of Adam and
Eve? Technically, this a question that never
really gets answered in the Old Testament. It
said they would die, but however, the Old
Testament word (H4191) is used differently
based on its contextual variants in Genesis. So
the Hebrew variants for the same word in
Genesis 2:17 and Genesis 5:5 are different.
While Adam died in Genesis 5:5 physically, he
certainly didnt after he ate from the fruit. This
is because Genesis 2:17 is referring to spiritual
death (separation from God.) Others will use the
excuse that Genesis 1:31 supports this idea since
death is not good. However, that is special
pleading and its more of allowing us to
determine what is good for creation instead of
God.
So now that we got some Old Testament
context for this topic, lets explore the death
aspect that is mentioned in the New Testament.

One of the most common verses that is used by

Young Earth Creationists is Romans 5:12.
However, though it says death entered the world
through sin, I dont think they read it entirely
and understand what it says. Here is the entire
verse with main points in bold: Wherefore, as
by one man sin entered into the world, and
death by sin; and so death passed upon all men,
for that all have sinned. We are dealing with
Original Sin where its not the concept of
physical death. We are dealing with the concept
of spiritual death again since this same kind of
thing is repeated in Romans 6:23. It states that
the wages of sin is death, but what does wages
mean? The Greek word is opsnion (G3800)
and it means in the Greek lexicons a payment.
So it is something you are paid for your deed.
However, the context does not indicate this
physical death would happen now as a result of
sin or later because of sin, but rather the word

for death (G2288) is referring to the spiritual

death.
Now before I decide to move on to the Early
Church, I would like to point out that not all the
time do we have death being taken literally in
the Bible. Lets start with 1 Peter 2:24: Who
his own self bare our sins in his own body on
the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live
unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were
healed. This verse says that Peter (and the
general we group of people in the verse) were
dead to sins. Were they dead physically or
metaphorically in reference to being slaves to
sin (Romans 6:20). John 3:16 is a good one that
everybody knows: For God so loved the
world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish,
but have everlasting life. So those who believe
in Jesus Christ (based on a plain literal reading)
will not perish or die physically and will have
eternal life so that they could live forever. I

would disagree with this interpretation that if

you believe in Jesus, youll become a human
who lives forever on Earth. This is referring to
spiritual death if you use common sense and
proper hermeneutics and biblical exegesis.

6. Genesis And The Early

Church
The final section that I want to end on is the
Early Church and their thoughts on the topic of
the age of the earth and the creation account in
general. So I will mostly focus on the anteNicene church fathers, but I may even go about
above the Nicene church fathers into some of
the preachers and scholars around Charles

Darwins time if I decide to go for comments

and views on this elsewhere.
How about we explore the topic from the
perspective St. Irenaeus in his writings known
as, Against Heresies, which was aimed at the
Gnostics. In Book V, we read the following in
Chapter XXIII: Thus, then, in the day that they
ate, in the same did they die, and became
death's debtors, since it was one day of the
creation And there are some, again, who
relegate the death of Adam to the thousandth
year; for since a day of the Lord is as a
thousand years, he did not overstep the
thousand years, but died within them, thus
bearing out the sentence of his sin (11). It
appears that what we are looking at here is that
Irenaeus is referring to passages like 2 Peter 3:8
to justify the idea that, in his own view, the
creation days were a thousand years and it
didnt take the full thousand year span for Adam
to eat of the fruit. Justin Martyr also shared a

similar view based on his Dialogue with Trypho

(12).
Clement of Alexandria was a Christian
Theologian who lived from 150 AD to 215 AD.
He was also a teacher at the Catechetical School
of Alexandria during the Ante-Nicene period in
the early church. In his writings entitled, The
Stromata, is one of Clements writings where he
explains the Christian Faith in his own words. In
Book Six, he states the following at Chapter
XVI: For the creations on the different days
followed in a most important succession; so that
all things brought into existence might have
honour from priority, created together in
thought, but not being of equal worth. Nor was
the creation of each signified by the voice,
inasmuch as the creative work is said to have
made them at once. For something must needs
have been named first. Wherefore those things
were announced first, from which came those
that were second, all things being originated

together from one essence by one power. For

the will of God was one, in one identity. And
how could creation take place in time, seeing
time was born along with things which exist
(13). Clement of Alexandria viewed the days
of creation as nothing more than the
arrangement and order of priority. He basically
thinks God is setting up which is more
honorable and powerful than the other. This idea
would be reasonable since Adam and Eve are
made last. Clement of Alexandria was more of a
believer in Instant Creationism. In other words,
he believed that everything from the planet to its
inhabitants were made in the same exact split
second for creation.
St. Augustine is probably a classic on this
topic. Two of his written works, The City of
God and On the Literal Meaning of Genesis,
speak a good bit on the topic of the days of
Genesis. This Christian philosopher, theologian
and Bishop of Hippo Regius had some

interesting words to say concerning the

difficulty of interpreting the text. Concerning
the meaning of the days, he writes: As for
these days, it is difficult, perhaps impossible to
think, let alone explain in words, what they
mean (14). In his book on the meaning of
Genesis, he states: At least we know that it
[referring to the Genesis day] is different from
the ordinary day with which we are familiar.
He also goes on in the book to state that the
different interpretations of the creation account
can be held without being branded as a heretic:
With these facts in mind, I have worked out
and presented the statements of the book of
Genesis in a variety of ways according to my
ability; and, in interpreting words that have
been written obscurely for the purpose of
stimulating our thought, I have not brashly
taken my stand on one side against a rival
interpretation which might possibly be better
(15). While Augustine made this statement, he

believed in the same way as Clement of

Alexandria, Irenaeus and even Origen.
What about the church during the time of
Charles Darwin and Evolution being published?
Were some of the greatest theologians and
pastors doubting the six days of Genesis? When
you look more, you dont see that since Asa
Gray, a devout Christian who was a Presbyterian
Deacon at his church while also being a
Botanist, wrote a book entitled Darwinia where
he explained that Evolution didnt have to be
opposed to theism. Concerning the study of
nature and theology, he states the following:
But does the one really exclude the other?
Does the investigation of physical causes stand
opposed to the theological view and the study of
the harmonies between mind and Nature? More
than this, is it not most presumable that an
intellectual conception realized in Nature would
be realized through natural agencies (16)? We
also have a person who identified as a

fundamentalist and even attributed to book,

The Fundamentals, B.B. Warfield. This
Princeton Theologian once made a comment
concerning the creation doctrine that John
Calvin held to: It should scarcely be passed
without remark that Calvin's doctrine of
creation is, if we have understood it aright, for
all except the souls of men, an evolutionary one
(17). Even though Charles H. Spurgeon was a
big opponent of Evolution, in a sermon from
The Power of the Holy Ghost, he states the
following: But if you will look in the first
chapter of Genesis, you will see there more
particularly set forth that peculiar operation of
power upon the universe which was put forth by
the Holy Spirit; you will then discover what was
his special work. In Ge 1:2, we read, And the
earth was without form, and void; and darkness
was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of
God moved upon the face of the waters. We do
not know how remote the period of the creation

of this globe may becertainly many millions

of years before the time of Adam. Our planet
has passed through various stages of existence,
and different kinds of creatures have lived on its
surface, all of which have been fashioned by
God (18). So theres what we need to know
about the early church.

7. Conclusion
So what are to conclude from what I have
just offered in my case? I can tell you what it
should not mean. It should not give people an
excuse to brag and call Young Earth Creationists
morons. If one were to do that, then they would
be fools and hypocrites. They would become
their own enemy that they do not want to be. We
should instead put aside our difference and

focus on preaching the Gospel as we are

commanded to do in Matthew 28:18-20. This
issue of the age of the earth or how exactly
things were created was still a thing divided in
the church, but it was not an important issue for
them. They instead focus on making sure the
church was practicing fellowship with God and
that they preached the Gospel.
Now I didnt prove evolution nor was that
my intention to do so. I was merely pointing out
that with the idea that people can hold to death
before the fall (in regards to Section 5) and the
age of the earth can be possibly billions of years
old, it is not something that would hinder nor
would it be a bad option for a person to hold to a
view that involved God being the director or
author (whatever term you wish to use) of some
form of an evolutionary process that is directed
by his will.
As a Christian, especially a Calvinist, this is
no problem for me to hold to since I believe in

the power and authority of Gods sovereign will.

I believe he has a plan for everybody and that
plan is just and righteous no matter what it is.
So if you are a Young Earth or Old Earth
Creationist, who is friends with an Evolutionary
Creationist, remember that at least they hold to
an idea where God is sovereign and is in full
control. Make sure these Creationists hold to the
idea that God is powerful and that he works
with his creation today. Shalom Aleichem.

Sources & Citations

1.) Polak, Frank H. "Poetic Style and
Parallelism in the Creation Account
(Genesis 1.1-2.3)." (Pg. 4)

2.) Derezzed83. "Genesis 1 Is Hebrew

Poetry." YouTube. YouTube, 07 Dec.
2013.
3.) Romeo and Juliet: Act 1, Scene 5.
4.) Juxtaposition - Examples and
Definition of Juxtaposition." Literary
Devices. 2013. Web. 04 June 2016.
<http://literarydevices.net/juxtaposition/>
.
5.) Stump, Jim. "Interpreting Adam: An
Interview with Denis Lamoureux, Part
2." BioLogos. 23 Apr. 2014. Web. 04
June 2016.
<http://biologos.org/blogs/jim-stump-

faith-and-science-seekingunderstanding/interpreting-adam-aninterview-with-denis-lamoureux-part-2>.
6.) William Wilson, Old Testament Word
Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel,
1978), 109.
7.) Gleason Archer, A Response to the
Trustworthiness of Scripture in Areas
Relating to Natural Science, in
Hermeneutics, Inerrancy, and the Bible,
ed. Earl D. Radmacher and Robert D.
Preus (Grand Rapids, MI: Academic
Books, 1986), 329.

8.) Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F.

Harrison, Editors, The Wycliffe Bible
Commentary (1990), 3.
9.) Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of
Bible Difficulties (1982), 62.
10.) C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A
Linguistic, Literary, And Theological
Commentary (2006), 56, 77.
11.) Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 5,
Chapter 23.
12.) Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho,
Chapter 81.

13.) Clement of Alexandria, The

Stromata, Book Six, Chapter 16.
14.) Augustine, The City of God:
Writings of Saint Augustine, vol. 14 (Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan/Fathers of
the Church, 1947), 196.
15.) Augustine, On the Literal Meaning
of Genesis 20:40.
16.) Gray, Asa. Darwinia: Essays and
Reviews Pertaining to Darwinism. New
York: D. Appleton, 1877. (p. 21)

17.) B.B. Warfield, The Princeton

Theologial Review, xiii. 1915, pp. 190255.
18.) Charles H. Spurgeon, The Power of
The Holy Ghost, Sermon 30.