'Untruths and Propaganda' – Churches of Christ, Darwinism, and the 1985-1986 ACU Evolution

149 Pages·2016·1.13 MB·English

AAbbiilleennee CChhrriissttiiaann UUnniivveerrssiittyy
DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss @@ AACCUU
Electronic Theses and Dissertations Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Spring 5-2016
‘‘UUnnttrruutthhss aanndd PPrrooppaaggaannddaa’’ –– CChhuurrcchheess ooff CChhrriisstt,, DDaarrwwiinniissmm,, aanndd
tthhee 11998855--11998866 AACCUU EEvvoolluuttiioonn CCoonnttrroovveerrssyy
Paul A. Anthony
Abilene Christian University, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.acu.edu/etd
Part of the Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, and the History of Christianity Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Anthony, Paul A., "‘Untruths and Propaganda’ – Churches of Christ, Darwinism, and the 1985-1986 ACU
Evolution Controversy" (2016). Digital Commons @ ACU, Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 8.
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at Digital
Commons @ ACU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized
administrator of Digital Commons @ ACU.
ABSTRACT
In 1985-1986, Abilene Christian University endured what one observer called the
worst attack in “size, nature and intensity” on a university affiliated with Churches of
Christ. The flashpoint was whether two biology professors were teaching evolution as
fact without refutation. The university denied it, but the controversy raged for two years.
Left unanswered was the most basic of questions: Did ACU professors actually teach
evolution without a creationist rebuttal? Which leads to another: Why in 1985 – 130
years after the publication of On the Origin of Species and 60 years after ACU had fired a
professor who questioned readings of Genesis – did the controversy erupt? This study
attempts to provide those answers.
This study answers the first question principally through the use of primary
sources – including interviews with those participants still alive and able to relay
memories of the events, as well as memos, letters, and notes written by ACU
administrators, faculty and students, and by the accusers and their allies. Secondary
sources are used to help describe the history of Darwinism among Churches of Christ,
especially in the decades leading to the ACU controversy. These sources include
previously published material, and articles and letters written by those who were
influential in shaping the assumptions of the movement.
The study finds that the controversy occurred when it did because of the decades-
long assumption among Churches of Christ – reinforced by ACU leaders – that evolution
was profoundly anti-Christian. But this attitude was not universally held, especially
among science faculty at ACU, who had become increasingly willing to accept aspects of
evolution. The study also finds that the accused faculty members did indeed teach
evolution as fact without rebuttal in their classes. The semantic ambiguity surrounding
the subject, however, allowed the university to issue denials eliding the substance of the
evidence presented against the professors.
This study concludes that the attack was ultimately unsuccessful in its aims. The
same forces that had led to the controversy – an unraveling of the consensus around
certain beliefs among Churches of Christ beginning in the 1970s – also limited the
effectiveness of the attacks.
‘Untruths and Propaganda’ –
Churches of Christ, Darwinism,
and the 1985-1986 ACU Evolution Controversy

A Thesis Presented
To the Graduate School of Theology
Abilene Christian University

In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Modern and American Christianity

By
Paul A. Anthony
May 2016
To Jocelyn, Grace, and Haven:
Be brave. Be kind. Be good.
Above all, never stop asking questions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The following work would not be possible first and foremost without those who
so generously gave of their time, their memories, and their archives at my request. They
are credited in the footnotes and the bibliography, but such citations cannot capture the
sacrifice required to reopen wounds that for some of them had clearly not quite healed
thirty years later.
I also am grateful to the Center for Restoration Studies – especially to Mac Ice,
who worked around my finicky schedule to help me get the time I needed with the papers
of W. W. Freeman, C. G. Gray, and others – and to Apologetics Press president Dave
Miller, who not only made available Bert Thompson’s archives, but showed tremendous
hospitality during my visit to Alabama.
This thesis was built on a foundation of several term papers written for Drs. Doug
Foster and Fred Aquino, whose mentorship with Dr. Brannan during this process has
been invaluable. They made me a better thinker and a better writer, as have a host of
current and former ACU Bible faculty over the past 16 years.
Finally, I owe a great debt to my wife, Jennifer, and my three daughters, to whom
this project is dedicated. Their willingness to let me pursue this degree – and all of the
absences both physical and mental it required – was indeed an act of love, one I can never
fully repay. I love you all very much!
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ........................................................................................................ iv
INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1
Significance, Scope, Limitations .............................................................................2
Definition of Terms..................................................................................................3
Churches of Christ .......................................................................................3
Abilene Christian University .......................................................................4
Creationism ..................................................................................................4
Evangelical ...................................................................................................4
Evolution, Darwinism, Organic Evolution ..................................................5
Organization .............................................................................................................6
Literature Review.....................................................................................................7
DARWINISM AMONG CHURCHES OF CHRIST, 1859-1984 .........................13
Increasing Suspicion, 1859-1959 ..........................................................................14
Solidified Consensus, 1960-1984 ..........................................................................29
EVOLUTION IN ABILENE, 1985-1986 ..............................................................44
Pro-Evolution Voices .............................................................................................44
James B. Throneberry and Neal D. Buffaloe .............................................44
Leroy Garrett ..............................................................................................47
Facts of the ACU Controversy ...............................................................................49
Public Phase ...........................................................................................................65
ASSESSING THE ALLEGATIONS AND RESPONSE .....................................71
The “Myth” Handout .............................................................................................73
Pro-Evolution Textbooks .......................................................................................74
Eyewitness Reports ................................................................................................75
Lisa Fitts.....................................................................................................75
Brenda Lobley ............................................................................................76
Other Students ............................................................................................77
The Professors ............................................................................................81
Conclusion about Allegations ................................................................................84
Response: Reliance on Semantics ..........................................................................85
Evolving Responses ...............................................................................................89
Possible Motivations ..............................................................................................96
Effects of the Response ........................................................................................100
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................107
Misinterpretation of Nuanced Positions...............................................................108
Generalizations and Ad Hominem Arguments ....................................................110
Balancing Academic and Faith Commitments ....................................................116
Brotherhood Publications.....................................................................................119
Different Results ..................................................................................................123
Conclusion ...........................................................................................................126
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................129
Primary Sources ...................................................................................................129
Articles and Contemporary Sources ....................................................................130
Secondary Sources ...............................................................................................137
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Cartoon sent to Bert Thompson, modified from the original published in the Firm
Foundation in 1965 ..........................................................................................................113
iii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Little scholarly research to date has explored the response among Churches of
Christ to the Darwinian theory of evolution, except briefly as part of larger projects on its
members’ shifting alliances with broader American Fundamentalism.1 Yet in the mid
1980s, evolution became the focal point of a significant rift between Abilene Christian
University and many of its constituents in Churches of Christ – significant in its length
and impact, and because ACU is one of the largest universities affiliated with the group.
Despite the recency of these events, exactly what was being taught in ACU’s biology
classes has been unclear, as has the full story of the university’s response to the
accusations against its professors.2 The 1985-1986 evolution controversy also raises a
fundamental question: Why did it erupt when it did, nearly 130 years after Darwin
published On the Origin of Species, more than 80 years after the university’s founding,
and six decades after it last publicly addressed the question?3
The purpose of this study is to document and analyze the ACU evolution
controversy in its context of conservative American Christianity in general, and Churches

1. Cf. Ronald L. Numbers, The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism (New York:
Knopf, 1992), 17; Michael Wilson Casey, “The Interpretation of Genesis One in the Churches of Christ:
The Origins of Fundamentalist Reactions to Evolution and Biblical Criticism in the 1920s” (Master’s
thesis: Abilene Christian University, 1989).
2. The story was initially told in the paper out of which this thesis has grown: Paul A. Anthony,
“‘Untruths and Propaganda:’ Surveying the 1985-86 Abilene Christian University Evolution Controversy,”
Restoration Quarterly 58 (Spring 2016): 40-53.
3. See below on the history of evolution at ACU and the 1922 firing of W. W. Freeman.
1