If the Hebrew Bible were properly translated and understood, one would not find any conflict with the theory of evolution which would prevent him from accepting both.
Mr. Hays—The defense counsel, of course, disclaims any knowledge on the subject, but knows there is a number of translations, and this witness would testify to them.
What Dr. H. E. Murkett Would Say.
We would also be able to prove that the Bible, properly interpreted, does not conflict with the theory of evolution by Dr. Herbert E. Murkett, pastor of First Methodist Church, Chattanooga.
There is nothing whatever in the belief in evolution that denies the divine story of creation. The non- Calvanistic churches have never believed, through their leaders, in divine fiat or determined and fixed processes as acts of God.
The divine story does not tell how man was made. It says that he was made out of the dust—that is, the material—it tells what God did with him when made—breathed into him his spirit. The process is not mentioned anywhere.
If the second chapter of Genesis is taken literally then the creation of man was progressive. First man is formed and he is put to sleep and through another process that no man can interpret, woman was made, and then through another process children were made and this process has been going on for centuries.
Take the statement that God said, "Let us make man in our image." This is open to interpretation. Was man already made? The story does not say, "Let us make another creature and call him man and let us make him after image." No, let us make man—already known, already a pat of the animal life—let us make him after our image. He was then endowed with the spirit of God, possessing his moral, spiritual and intelligent nature.
Again note the story in the second chapter of Genesis. Man is introduced as perfectly naked, and does not know it; he is ignorant of right and wrong. This is a story of a man awakening to the consciousness of right and wrong, of the consequences of such a knowledge, and he begins the only process known to allay the pangs of conscience and lack of harmony with his Creator.
To science and not to the Bible must man look for the answer to the question as to the process of man's creation. To the Bible and not science must men look for the answer to the cause of man's intelligence, his moral and spiritual being.
Man is here and must be accounted for from two standpoints. He is a physical being and lives the life of all other physical beings and is a study for material science. He is spiritual and lives in the realm of spirit and for understanding of that spiritual side one must study the science of theology. When these two shall be harmonized then will we have an understanding of this dual personality that follows after God rather than the animal existence, who plays with God's laws and learns how. He operates them, who sees in spirit and then transforms the vision into locomotives, airplanes, telegraph instruments, radio, and by many inventions overcomes time and space.
Students have a right lo be taught the truth about the whole man rather than a half truth. The future of human progress demands.
Mr. Hays—Our next witness would be Donald F. Metcalf and I think I stated his qualification the other day.
The Court—His testimony is in the record?
Mr. Hays—I have a few statements I will read.
The Court—All right.
(Excerpts of the statement of Mr. Metcalf were thereupon read.)
Mr. Darrow—I take it you want all of the testimony incorporated in the record?
Mr. Hays—Yes, of course, the whole statement will go into the record.
The Court—Yes, let the whole statement go into the record.
