Re: An interesting atheist book

From: glenn.morton@btinternet.com
Date: Fri May 30 2003 - 18:02:32 EDT

  • Next message: Burgy: "Re: Do non-U.S. Christians say "God Bless America?""

    It is a bit amazing that when I provide actual quotations from the
    period, they are ignored or disbelieved. Is historical research
    about disbelieving statements from those who lived in the period
    under question? I would assume it is from your responses.

    > from: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
    > date: Thu, 29 May 2003 22:57:27
    > to: glenn.morton@btinternet.com, asa@calvin.edu
    > subject: Re: An interesting atheist book
    >
    > The 1880s and 1890s were the period when the conflict thesis of science and
    > religion was put forward by the likes of Huxley.
    > Huxley made up accounts of the so-called Huxley Wilberforce confrontation of
    > 1860 which has been demythologised by scholars like John Brooke, Frank
    > Field JR Lucas etc.
    > Leslie Stephen made up stroires how he lost his faith in the 1860s cos of
    > the Flood . Sir Owen Chadwick scotched that from a detailed study
    >
    > I could go on.
    >
    > The quote from Hardwicke proves nothing except what atheists percieved.
    >
    > Here we go again
    >
    > Michael
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Glenn Morton" <glenn.morton@btinternet.com>
    > To: <asa@calvin.edu>
    > Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 9:33 PM
    > Subject: An interesting atheist book
    >
    >
    > > During our last week here in Aberdeen, my wife went (once again)
    > antiquing.
    > > She found a book by Arthur B. Moss with a preface by Herbert Junius
    > > Hardwicke, entitled, The Bible and Evolution. The preface is dated March
    > > 10th, 1890. In the preface Hardwicke writes:
    > >
    > > "It has often struck me with surprise that so many intelligent and
    > educated
    > > people still cling to the old myths and superstitions of the past, when
    > > reason and common sense so clearly proclaim them to be utterly unworthy of
    > > acceptance. It seems almost incredible that, in the latter part of the
    > > nineteenth century, a large proportion of the people of Europe still
    > profess
    > > to believe the fables of the Creation, FAll, and Redemptions,
    > > notwithstanding the fact that science and reason both declare them to have
    > > been impossible as historic occurrences." Herbert Junius Hardwicke,
    > > "Preface" in Arthur B. Moss, The Bible and Evolution, (London: Watts and
    > > Company, c. 1890), p. 3
    > >
    > > This was not the type of book my wife expected to have purchased.
    > However,
    > > it does show that my claim that Biblical literalism was not dead in the
    > late
    > > 19th century is basically correct. It also is supportive of the view that
    > > Biblical literalism was not revived in 1961 as some claim. Claims that
    > there
    > > wasn't a battle over Genesis, Geology and Biblical literalism and
    > evolution
    > > are clearly falsified by literature of the day. Here we have atheists
    > > claiming that there are many biblical literalists in the 19th century, but
    > > modern historians seem to think this wasn't the case. I simply don't know
    > > why. Do they not read the actual 19th century literature?
    > >
    > > This will be added to my web page
    > > http:\\www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk\nineteenth.htm
    > >
    > >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 30 2003 - 18:05:12 EDT