(The wording of the question did not rule out a long period of animal evolution before the appearance of man, however.) Another 40 percent agreed with the following statement: "Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, including man's creation." Only 9 percent of the sample said that they accepted the naturalistic view of evolution, which in Gallup's wording was that man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, with God having no part in this process.Against that background of public opinion, we can see why the voice from the audience was asking exactly the right question, and also why we might expect a science teacher at a Christian institution to take a deep breath before answering in a quavering voice.
From a Darwinist viewpoint, however, this soft form of creationism is merely a relatively advanced kind of misunderstanding.
Did the teacher really explain to her students and their parents that biological evolution is not God-directed but rather a purposeless process that produced mankind by accident?
Man is the result of a purposeless and natural process that did not have him in mind.' The literature of evolutionary biology contains countless statements to the same effect.
"Evolution," honestly understood, is not just a gradual process of development that a purposeful Creator might have chosen to employ. a purposeless and undirected process that produced mankind accidentally.
A recent issue of reported on a local meeting at which the featured speaker was a woman identified as "a religious person and science teacher at a Catholic school." This science teacher was assuring her audience that despite the religious affiliation of her school, she taught evolution and not creationism in her science classes.
A questioner from the audience put her on the spot by asking: "Do you think that evolution is directed?
"Properly" educated people gradually learn that forces like mutation and selection were adequate to perform all the work of biological creation, and that the notion of a purposeful Creator is therefore superfluous, discardable without loss.
By controlling the terminology, then, Darwinists have given the world the impression that the significant divide in public opinion about evolution is that between the Genesis literalists and everybody else. For the fundamental disagreement is not over the age of the earth or the method of creation; it is over whether we owe our existence to a purposeful Creator or a blind materialistic process.
" The newsletter reports that this question was followed by a "dramatic pause," after which the teacher replied with what it called a "baffled 'No.'" The reporter for commented: "I would have expected a more rapid answer, but the battle between her curriculum and her beliefs had a few more moments of unrest left to settle." The appearance of that story coincided with the release of a new Gallup Poll, reporting on the state of American opinion regarding evolution and creation.
According to this survey, approximately 47 percent of Americans can be described as creationists, in that they say they believe that God created mankind in pretty much our present form sometime within the last 10,000 years.