The Bible NETWork ~ Impacting the World for Christ one post at a time!

There isn't a logical link, I don't think. People who make this leap are certainly leaving the confines of science as they do so.

The hard and fast dividing line is "microevolution" is concerned with adaptation only while evolution is concerned with the creation of new species. God, in His infinite wisdom included a mechanism (epigenetics) in our DNA which allows us to adapt to new and threatening environments. There are many examples of this happening. The adaptation of Tibetans to high altitude oxygen threatening environment for one. The evolutionists stretched the boundaries of evolution theory beyond reason in vain attempts to explain this phenomenon. The fact is it happened too quickly for evolution theory to account for.

Epigenetics blasts "random and spontaneous mutations" out of the water. There is nothing "random" in changes to species that are observable.

Andy,

Science has a model of the universe that does not reference purpose in the explanation of mechanism. Those who claim that science asserts the absence of purpose misconstrue science. This misconstruction is rampant in today's world.

The people who want to introduce creationism into the science curriculum are, in my opinion, barking up the wrong tree. The problem is not whether creationism belongs in the science curriculum. It is, rather whether an education that includes science, technology, commerce, and job skills is complete.

I contend that an education that does not teach faith is woefully indequate. If the judges are telling us that we can't teach faith in the public schools because that's repugnant to the constitution, then we need to change the judges or, perhaps, change the constitution itself. Neither of those two are easy.

_________________
Not all those who wander are lost.

It is impossible to teach a single faith in public schools given our constitution. If it were allowed which brand of faith would we teach? I recall the Bible being read in school and prayers being uttered when I was a child. I remember ministers coming into the homeroom and addressing the class. The difficulty arises when you determine what faith (doctrine) is to be taught? Do Christians want their children exposed to Mormon, Hindu, Islam, and any or all the rest of the doctrines out there? I don't think so.

The answer is very clear, start Christian schools and teach the Christian doctrine in them. As a former Christian School administrator I can tell you from experience the quality of education can be better than that of public schools and the environment is wonderful. Graduates generally have higher SAT, ACT scores so college is generally not a problem. The sciences of evolution, abiogenesis, and cosmology can be taught and the glaring errors of each exposed.

There are no valid arguments for exclusively teaching Christianity in public schools. I wasn't very happy when a Catholic Priest showed us how to say a "Hail Mary." How would Christians like a Mormon teaching their children there are three heavens and only Mormons can go to the third where God is? How about a Church of Christ Pastor telling the kids if their church is not named "Church of Christ" they are going to hell?

The difficulties you lay out are real. But teaching no faith in the public schools amounts to teaching atheism. The Constitution didn't forbid teaching faith in the public schools until 1947. Somebody changed it. We could change it back.


As a side note, I remember when Catholic instruction was given our school, even though it was a private and non Catholic school. That was in Colombia in the 1950s. To this day, I can say an Ave Maria without skipping a beat. But only in Spanish!

_________________
Not all those who wander are lost.

In some schools, sadly, because of lack of funds, they no longer teach music. This does not amount to teaching that music does not exist. Secular education is not the same as atheist indoctrination. Secular education ensures that no one's viewpoint is favored at the expense of others.

_________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."

-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34

Secular education favors the atheist viewpoint, IMO. We are just going to have to agree to disagree. I see no way of resolving this one.

Not teaching music doesn't teach that music doesn't exist. But it does teach that music doesn't matter in the context of education.

_________________
Not all those who wander are lost.

Well, they might still learn *about* music and its importance in our culture. But they wouldn't be *performing* music.

Similarly, public schools teach about the importance of religion in literature and history, but they are forbidden from leading students in 'performing' religion.

_________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."

-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34

OK. Students should not have to "perform" religion. They should be exposed to, and gain a grounding in, the religion that is part of their community's cultural heritage. For some communities, that would mean exposure to Christianity.

I've had enough of this digression. How about if we return to the main theme of the discussion?

_________________
Not all those who wander are lost.

_________________
Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brothers to dwell together in unity!

Forum Code of Conduct
The Bible NETWork Doctrinal Statement
The NET Bible Study Environment
Pastors Pro-Life Resource Center
Biblical Eldership