"Following the creation concept that creation processes differed from preservation processes, it is suggested that God endowed each created kind, at the time of its creation, with potential for vast variety"
About this Quote
The sentence has the measured, institutional cadence of a man trying to make a controversial position sound like neutral procedure. Lang’s key move is the split between “creation processes” and “preservation processes,” a bit of conceptual carpentry designed to reconcile two pressures: an orthodox commitment to divine origin and a plain-eyed recognition that the living world is messy, diverse, and changing. By treating variation as “potential” preloaded at the start, the quote offers a theological workaround: you can have abundant diversity without conceding that new forms emerge through open-ended evolution.
The phrase “each created kind” does a lot of quiet work. It’s not scientific taxonomy, but it borrows the aura of classification, implying that boundaries in nature are real, stable, and legible - even if we argue about where they sit. “Vast variety” then functions as a concession to observable facts (dogs, crops, breeds, regional adaptations) while keeping the origin story safely contained. Change is permitted, even celebrated, but only as a controlled unfolding of an initial design rather than a creative force in its own right.
Contextually, this reads like mid-century creationist rhetoric responding to a culture where evolutionary science had become the default public language of origins. The intent isn’t just to assert belief; it’s to sound reasonable, to claim compatibility with evidence by reframing that evidence as “preservation” - maintenance, not invention. The subtext: you can grant the world’s variability without granting nature the authorship.
The phrase “each created kind” does a lot of quiet work. It’s not scientific taxonomy, but it borrows the aura of classification, implying that boundaries in nature are real, stable, and legible - even if we argue about where they sit. “Vast variety” then functions as a concession to observable facts (dogs, crops, breeds, regional adaptations) while keeping the origin story safely contained. Change is permitted, even celebrated, but only as a controlled unfolding of an initial design rather than a creative force in its own right.
Contextually, this reads like mid-century creationist rhetoric responding to a culture where evolutionary science had become the default public language of origins. The intent isn’t just to assert belief; it’s to sound reasonable, to claim compatibility with evidence by reframing that evidence as “preservation” - maintenance, not invention. The subtext: you can grant the world’s variability without granting nature the authorship.
Quote Details
| Topic | God |
|---|
More Quotes by Walter
Add to List
