Back to Index
Why I Am A Creationist
by Dr. Wayne Frair
The following excerpts are drawn from a far more extensive chronicle of Dr. Frair’s spiritual and scientific pilgrimage that is also available at no cost from AIIA. What follows here is an original, never-before-published article. Dr. Frair has been an AIIA Resource Associate since 2000. He is author of more than 50 research papers, co-author of A Case for Creation (see inset), and co-contributor to Science & Christianity: Four Views, just published (©2000) by Inter-Varsity Press.
I received Jesus Christ as my personal Savior in January 1945, while in the U.S. Navy.
After serving in the Navy I entered the University of Massachusetts and took my first course in biology. The course was supposed to be general botany, but turned out to be primarily a course on how flowering plants demonstrated evolution, particularly in their embryology.
I studied general zoology under a Harvard Ph.D., Gilbert L. Woodside, an embryologist convinced that the stages in embryological development represented a summary of the ancient evolutionary past.
I learned about homology, i.e. the similar limb bones of amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. The likenesses were defined as being the result of common ancestry.
Because I was a new Christian, I still was somewhat uncertain just what to believe about the subject of origins. I recognized that the book of Genesis was inspired by God, and it appeared to me to be presenting historical information. I desperately needed help, so in my junior year I transferred to a leading Christian college (Houghton), majoring in zoology and minoring in chemistry and in Bible. After graduation, I spent another year and summer at Wheaton College, packing in all the science, theology, and apologetics courses I could.
Returning to the University of Massachusetts for graduate school, to my surprise, I found myself in an experimental embryology course with Dr. Woodside, my former freshman zoology professor. He was a great teacher, and I chose to work under him for a Master’s Degree in embryology. A greater surprise was that Dr. Woodside had completely changed his view about embryology and evolution. Embryology was Darwin’s main ‘proof’ for evolutionary change, but the evidence which had led Darwin to this conclusion had been falsified by scientist Ernst Haeckel.
After receiving my degree, I took more graduate zoology and biochemistry at Brown and New York Universities, and taught biology courses at The King’s College in New York.
I met men who were Christians and scientists, who belonged to the American Scientific Affiliation, founded in 1941 to oppose evolution.
I read Evolution, Creation and Science by Professor Frank Lewis Marsh. It showed that science supports the concept of separate kinds which had diversified to produce all the varieties we see today among fossil and living forms. It was a very important reason that I accepted the “kinds” concept.
Geneticist and theologian John W. Klotz, through his writings and personal talks with me, strongly helped strengthen my creationist position.
I began teaching at Rutgers University, and doing graduate work toward a Ph.D. in serology.
After completing basic studies in serology and gaining proficiency in laboratory procedures, I entered a graduate course taught by the master himself, Dr. Alan Boyden, Zoology Department Chairman. This was an origins course, and all we studied was “evolution.” But I think to the amazement of all of us graduate students, it was an “anti-evolution” course, at least as most of us understood the word evolution. Defining evolution as “change,” the professor distinguished between micro-evolution (small change), and macro-evolution (large change). He emphasized that it was bad science in most cases to extrapolate from the small changes for which there was plenty of evidence to large changes which in most cases were just imaginary. I think all those in the class were stunned at first, but as the weeks went on nobody could doubt the force of his arguments. Most evolutionists think the small changes eventually lead to the large changes, and this whole process simply is termed ‘evolution,’ even today by a majority of the scientific community.
The evolutionary arguments that seemed so convincing during my early months of biology study have gradually yielded to contrary data.
The problems are not all solved… but the position which I feel is most consistent with Scriptural and scientific data today is that God created certain basic kinds or types which since the time of creation have varied to a limited extent, producing many varieties presently found as fossils and living forms.
For more information, you may wish to contact an organization with which Dr. Frair has long served…
Creation Research Society