Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 1999. / Title from title page screen, viewed July 20, 2006. Dissertation Committee: Elizabeth Lugg (chair), Dianne Ashby, Amee Adkins, Andrew Lugg. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 236-245) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004. / Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 153-161).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1984. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 379-407).

Thesis (M.F.A.)--Montana State University--Bozeman, 2007. / Typescript. Chairperson, Graduate Committee: Theo Lipfert. Includes DVD. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 23-24).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004. / Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 153-161).

Thesis (Th. M.)--Temple Baptist Theological Seminary, 1985. / Bibliography: leaves 91-95.

Human origins have been debated by evolutionists and creationists. Christian young adults are educated first on creationism and learn of evolution later. This delayed education of evolution leads to potential belief change and stress. This belief change process may be similar to Berry’s acculturation. After belief change, individuals may exhibit belief bias during human origin argument evaluation. Little research has been done to explore a formal belief change model and belief bias in human origin argument evaluation. Data was collected from 121 PSYC 102 and MTurk participants in an online survey measuring evolution and creationist beliefs. Vignettes presented evidence for creationism and evolution. This evidence was evaluated by participants. Cluster analyses, MANOVAs, and ANOVAs were used to determine statistical significance. Results found three groups of individuals exist and these groups differed on age of exposure to evolution and belief change stress measures. These groups evaluated creationism and evolution evidence differently exhibiting belief bias during argument evaluation. These results expand current literature by finding a potential belief change model and preliminary evidence to support earlier teaching of evolution in schools. Limitations include violated statistical assumptions and forced clusters. Further research is needed to explore these three groups in more detail.

This study is an attempt to construct a new biblical creationism as solution to the problem of the relationship between religion and science. It examines the challenge of modern evolutionism and the churches' responses against it. The modern evolutionism as the acting hypothesis of many modern scientific disciplines helps the Church to re-examine its traditional doctrine of creation. There are two Christian responses against the challenge: individually, various positions are active, such as the theistic evolutionism, the recent special creationism, and the old earth creationism; collectively, the Christian churches have not given careful consideration to the challenge. This study examines the creation account in Genesis 1 according to the Kantian epistemology of the writer's Th. M dissertation, an examination of modern eschatology. It proposes a presentist understanding of creation as the tentative alternative to the traditional creationism. It suggests that: 1) In evolution debate both creationists and evolutionists seem to assume there is an examined scientific creationism. 2) Because the traditional divine report model is unverifiable, we need to construct a scientific model. 3) The account seems to follow the ancient clay tablet format. 4) This study proposes a 'new habitat orientation week' model: the assumed observer's report of daily recognition of the wonderful world. 5) It informs us both of the responsibility for the world and of the significance of communal life. 6) It may provide a balanced foundation both for the sound relationship between science and religion and for the positive Christian worldview. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Dogmatics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

This study is an attempt to construct a new biblical creationism as solution to the problem of the relationship between religion and science. It examines the challenge of modern evolutionism and the churches' responses against it. The modern evolutionism as the acting hypothesis of many modern scientific disciplines helps the Church to re-examine its traditional doctrine of creation. There are two Christian responses against the challenge: individually, various positions are active, such as the theistic evolutionism, the recent special creationism, and the old earth creationism; collectively, the Christian churches have not given careful consideration to the challenge. This study examines the creation account in Genesis 1 according to the Kantian epistemology of the writer's Th. M dissertation, an examination of modern eschatology. It proposes a presentist understanding of creation as the tentative alternative to the traditional creationism. It suggests that: 1) In evolution debate both creationists and evolutionists seem to assume there is an examined scientific creationism. 2) Because the traditional divine report model is unverifiable, we need to construct a scientific model. 3) The account seems to follow the ancient clay tablet format. 4) This study proposes a 'new habitat orientation week' model: the assumed observer's report of daily recognition of the wonderful world. 5) It informs us both of the responsibility for the world and of the significance of communal life. 6) It may provide a balanced foundation both for the sound relationship between science and religion and for the positive Christian worldview. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Dogmatics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

Thesis (M.A.)--University of North Carolina Wilmington, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed September 29, 2008) Includes bibliographical references (p. [64]-71)