BIBLE AND SCIENCE.

Hokitika Guardian, 24 July 1925, Page 3

BIBLE AND SCIENCE.

AN EVOLUTIONIST’S TEST SLUT. [Australia & N.Z. Cable Association.] WASHINGTON, July 22. A test suit to restrain the authorities from teaching the theory of evolution and also other science in public schools in the district of Columbia has been tiled by -Mr Laurence Wittner, a Government Clerk, who says he is oli the side of science. The suit involves all the unheard evidence in the Scopes trial, it also seeks to prevent the payment of the teachers’ salaries, under the clause of the Appropriation Tfill passed by Congress, which states that no part of the funds should lie used to teach disrespect for the Bible.

The petition contends that biology denies the Biblical story of the origin of man, and it teaches the disintegration of organic bodies after death, whereas the Bible says that all will rise on Judgment Day. The biology also refuses to accept the Biblical statement that man is a perfect physical image of God. The suit alleges that the chemistry teaches that one element of matter cannot lie changed into another, whereas the Bible says that Christ made wine from water, that God made man from the dust of the earth, and that God turned Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt. The petition further alleges that physics teaches that the lainhow is but Hie natural reflection of light rays on water in the clouds, whereas the Bible states God made the rainbow as a promise to Noah that no flood would again kill all life. Physics also alleges that astronomy shows the sun is the centre of the solar system, around which the earth revolves, whereas the Bible states that the earth is the centre of the universe; that the earth was created four days before the sun, and that tht* sun, moon and stars travel around the earth.

The petition alleges that philology shows that language and speech are a gradual outgrowth of thought, whereas the Bible teaches that the earth had one language, until God confounded man's speech in the lower of Babel. Mr Wittner has brought the suit as a taxpayer of the district. He said: “ 1 am on the side of science. I have Tiled a suit to determine what Congress reallv meant by the restrictive chi Use.” WASHINGTON. July 22. The Treasury officials have been ordered hv a local Court to show cause why tile salaries of school officers here should not be withheld because of the teaching of seietilic doctrines, which are alleged to reflect on the Bible. The suit hrought by Laurence Wittner, as a taxpayer, is under the provisions of the District of Columbia Appropriation Bill, providing that no salary shall lie paid any superintendent who permits or anv teacher who teaches, disrespect of the Bible. Wittner assorts the teaching of approved text hooks, taken literally, conflict with the Scripture text.