Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
Perhaps the conventional view of the centuries-long conflict between geology and Chris-
tianity should be viewed as more of a coevolutionary process. As geological interpretations
of earth history evolved away from and evidence mounted against a single, worldwide de-
luge, Christians responded in three ways: some abandoned the Bible as an authoritative
text; some tried to reconcile biblical and scientific views; and others simply rejected evid-
ence they perceived to threaten biblical authority. These approaches correspond, respect-
ively, to secular modernism, mainstream Christianity, and reactionary fundamentalism.
To a geologist like myself, interpreting ancient stories of great floods presents an alluring
challenge. I would hope that we can all appreciate how, after centuries of debate and creat-
ive explanations, it appears that humanity's rich legacy of flood stories reflects a variety of
ancient disasters. The global pattern of tsunamis, glacial outburst floods, and catastrophic
flooding of lowlands like Mesopotamia or the Black Sea basin fits rather well the global
distribution and details of flood stories. Considered together, geological and anthropologic-
al evidence suggests rational explanations for why flood stories are uncommon in Africa,
why they are so different in China, and why they are widespread in the Middle East, north-
ern Europe, America, and all across the Pacific. Time and again, great floods swept worlds
away in disasters remarkable enough to shape humanity's oldest stories, which were then
passed down through generations—and civilizations—to become powerful legends.
Every day at work, I walk past a slab of polished rock that elegantly refutes the idea
of Noah's Flood as being the sole event of earth history. It hangs on the wall down the
hall from my department's office and is a gorgeous tableau of colorful sedimentary rocks
embedded within different sedimentary rock—a stone tablet made from cobbles, gravel,
and sand. Like Steno's solid within a solid, this conglomerate shows that at least two
grand catastrophes or geological cycles played a role in earth history. One cannot stand be-
fore it and embrace young-Earth creationism and its single world-wrecking flood without
abandoning faith in earth history told by the rocks themselves.
Contrary to creationist claims, reading the geologic record does not depend on pale-
ontology and evolution—they provide complementary constraints on earth history. The
astounding degree of agreement between the geologic and fossil records would require mir-
acles upon miracles, were it not simply indicative of the fact that they independently recor-
ded the same grand story.
