Is it dangerous to teach evolutionary theory to children?

Faith & Science Conversation
41

about biblical knowledge, start with Col chapter 2 and go from there.

as far as a blow hole at the top of a whale’s body, can you help me to understand ET’s true nature by helping me to understand how God fits into this picture? I will preface this with a quote from I think Einstein-if you cannot explain something to a child, chances are you don’t understand it yourself. So with that, we have a whale like creature that breathes through its mouth. It is going along and is perfectly capable of survival by lifting its head above the water line to breath. It even develops muscle groups that make this process easier. So-again speaking to a 3rd grader-so what caused the wind pipe to alter directions away from the front of the face to the top of the body behind the head? The design is ingenious of course-what caused this? And this is simple compared to how land animals evolved to flying animals or how eyesight came into existence. But for the blow hole scenario, would you tell that 3rd grader that energy from the sun or chance mutation cause for this change or would you say that God instrumentally intervened in the process to give the whale an easier ability to breath?

42

@Grog,

I don’t even understand how someone - - who doesn’t believe Physics or Geology can pin down the age of the Earth (the Earth we are standing on ) - - can participate in this list.

If you reject Physics and Geology … you certainly aren’t going to accept any other more nuanced area of science.

It would be as if I said, I can’t believe in Genesis, because I’m an Atheist. How would you use any Biblical proof at that point?

43

nobody here told any creationist that they are a fool but the non believing scientists out there sure do. I have met them. We are fools fools fools to a world that does not want to live accountable to God. When I am writing, I am thinking about non-believing scientists who cannot accept the idea of God who develop models that disallow Him and the models are always naturalistic in their nature. The bone I have to pick is I believe that they come across as so believable and in so many numbers across the globe that they attempt to pull believing Christians into their fold.

Sometimes when talking to folks who claim to be believers, I find them doing more to prove the godless naturalists right and the God of the Bible fearing believers wrong.

44

@Grog,

Which is why you should join the BioLogos position … that requires God to be at the center of all these scientific approaches…

45

No, you a missing my point. The sun helps to grow seeds designed by God. It is foolish to believe that the sun created the seed. And this is exactly the position of naturalistic evolutionists. they believe that over eons energy which is amoral and unintelligent can create complexity out of simplicity. We are talking an eye or a brain or a dna strand out of nothing by the power of energy through chance alone. Don’t you think this is foolish?

46

When others call us fools, we gratefully and humbly rejoice, because Jesus told us we should.

“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you." (Mt 5:11-12)

One thing we don’t do is call names back, because Jesus said we shouldn’t.

“Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” (Mt 22:37-39)

Sometimes when talking to my brothers and sisters in Christ, I find them doing more to slander their fellow brothers and sisters in Christ than to focus on the evidence God put in creation or on the Biblical imperative to love their neighbors as themselves.

5 Likes
47

Ah, so you believe God intervenes to create the DNA of each individual seed so that each seed can grow in complexity with the aid of the sun?

I think you are oversimplifying badly. I think there are natural processes which, once begun, can easily snowball in effect, growing as long as they have the right conditions to feed the process. A fire is one example; a spark can grow into a large blaze that lasts as long as it has air and fuel. A snowball rolling down a hill is another example. A snowflake grows from one tiny crystal to an intricate network. A whirlwind or tornado or hurricane sustains itself for a time in a feedback loop. And complex molecules, once they hit the tipping point of becoming their own feedback loop, will grow in complexity as long as they have favorable conditions: an energy gradient, like that provided by sunlight, and physical space and raw materials in which to expand.

Many people here will support you if you want to involve God in that first tipping point. That’s fine. Many others will prefer to attribute the whole process in its entirety to God.

To answer your question, no, I don’t find it foolish.

48

Jesus called the pharisees a “brood of vipers” and “whitewashed tombs” this is called name calling.

And He name calls all of humanity as imperfect sinful sheep. He says that no one is good, not even one.

Creationism is on the rise in His church. I, a self professing sheep, don’t have all of the answers but I sure will side closer to those in the Bible inerrancy camp before the godless naturalist one in the broad principles they both espouse. That is just me. Take this not as slander but as discourse to sharpen each other in the name of Christ.

49

[Edited to include the quote to which I was responding, for ease of reference]

Jesus knew what was in men’s hearts. Do you know what’s in my heart, Greg? What about the hearts of all those atheist scientists? Until you know what’s in people’s hearts, perhaps you might be a bit more chastened about proclaiming that you know.

But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.(Mt 5:22)

Thankfully, evolutionary creationism is part of the creationism that’s on the rise! Hallelujah!

Yes, that is just you. As for me, I will not side with any camp. I will look at the evidence as honestly as I can (with fear and trembling and never absolute certainty) and side with that.

I am honored that you would think that we could sharpen one another in the name of Christ. That means that you must at least consider me a semi-Christian (which is more than you’ve granted so far) and you think I might actually be able to sharpen you, if God should so use me! Wow, that’s encouraging indeed!

2 Likes
50

I couldn’t agree more.

2 Likes
51

I never called you personally a name, nor would I ever suggest that you are a “semi-Christian!” I am calling out ideologies formulated by men for what they seem on face value and this is exactly what the Bible calls us to do. We are to examine ideas and hold them to the light of the precepts of Scripture and discern. Discern how they may produce long and short term harm to the church, Jesus’ bride.

I am not calling you a name. I am discussing a topic and if you take offense, I am sorry. I am sure that you are thinking of names you would like to call me for not siding with the majority in this discussion.

Chris Falter seems like a very genuine believer who has shared with me perspectives about evolution. He says that there is all of this evidence for this …the 9 points for this…etc. yet I see first hand how on Nat Geo took one single skull that looked like a whale skull and defined the entire evolutionary family tree based on this starting with the animal that this skull represented…an animal with legs and fur that would be impossible to define without a full skeleton. At least this is the way this nat geo video presents. They have a skull and nothing more!

The chatter back to me after calling this false science out was, "well there is a ton of science that points to the legitimacy of the evolutionary thought that does not afford the need to expound upon the presumption in this Nat Geo video. So what is the evidence? If a scientist can take a single skull and declare it evolution and declare the family tree of the whale, then I wonder if all the other evidence not mentioned is based on the same type of presumptions as did this small example. And from what I have read from brilliant creationists, this is indeed seems to be the case. Evidence to fit the mold of a worldview.

Naturalists subscribe to a worldview that disallows God as creator of kinds so they fit the evidence to fit the mold.

I need to stop beating a dead horse. I never called you personally a name. I would never ever judge your heart. But I do have children who are 10, 13 and 15 and they will have kids one day. I am not going to sit back and watch the start of the evolution of the watering down of Biblical theology because of the ways things seem for this to develop into churchwide apostacy that could cause increase in the chances that my kids and grandkids to miss out on the true Jesus. So I ruffle feathers along the way to the point that some think I am judging man’s hearts which is never my intent. Judging a man’s heart is one of the most heinous sins named in the Bible as it is a category for God alone. But bringing issues to the light of His Word is welcomed. If I ruffle feathers along the way, and get accused of being judgemental, and that is the way it has to be, then so be it. I suppose.

52

You might want to remember what inerrant means. It means the original writings in the original languages was inerrant. The translation to English is NOT inerrant. The interpretation from English is NOT inerrant.

2 Likes
53

Do you have a link to your National Geographic video?

54

[quote=“grog, post:51, topic:35076”]
We are to examine ideas and hold them to the light of the precepts of Scripture and discern. [/quote]
But you’re not examining evidence, while falsely claiming that you are.

First hand? Are you kidding? Watching a video isn’t engaging with the evidence, Greg.

[quote] how on Nat Geo took one single skull that looked like a whale skull and defined the entire evolutionary family tree based on this starting with the animal that this skull represented…an animal with legs and fur that would be impossible to define without a full skeleton. At least this is the way this nat geo video presents.
[/quote]You only watched part of it, remember? Then made a sweeping claim for which you would need to have examined all of the evidence.

1 Like
55

You never called me a name. It’s true. But you did imply, and you have many times implied in this Forum, that those who embrace evolutionary creationism do so out of sub-Christian motives. That is presumptuous and slanderous, and I have called you out on it, and you refuse to acknowledge it, even now. You’re not “ruffling feathers.” You’re choosing to believe the worst about people, which runs counter to the standard of love that God calls us to in 1 Corinthians 13. Minimizing this sin does not make it any more excusable or any less offensive.

3 Likes
56

Greg, Greg, Greg -

There is plenty about the universe that God made that is very confusing. You were very confused about quantum mechanics vs. relativity, for example. That’s no shame; a lot of people find that confusing. Even the physicists who understand the math, and understand how it explains physics evidence, and understand how it can be used to formulate new hypotheses, think that physics can be very unintuitive.

How about languages? Do you think Mandarin Chinese is simple or confusing? Have you ever tried learning it? How does it seem at first? How about Fusha Arabic? Or Navaho? Or an African click language–I bet if you heard it, you would find it confusing. Don’t you think?

So why do you think that if you don’t understand a scientific topic after a few minutes of study, it must just be all wrong and ridiculous. Do you think that Mandarin Chinese is ridiculous and wrong after listening to it for a few minutes? If it doesn’t seem that way to you, you haven’t listened very carefully to Mandarin Chinese, or to Xhosa. But you would give the benefit of the doubt to the native speakers of the language; surely it must make sense to them, even if it makes no sense to you.

Just like it can take years of study to make sense of a language like Xhosa, it can take years of study to make sense of science. You’re nowhere close to becoming a “native speaker” of science with a high school education.

You seem to be disappointed that science is difficult. The fact that you find a scientific theory unintuitive does not constitute the tiniest bit of evidence regarding its validity, Greg. I’m sorry to say that, but you need to hear that. And my opinion is completely irrelevant, as well. The ones whose voices get heard are the ones who invest decades of their lives in painstaking inquiry, research, and publication.

Plus, the Bible clearly states that a fine understanding of nature is beyond most people’s natural ability.

I Kings 4:29ff:
And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding exceeding much, and largeness of heart, even as the sand that is on the sea shore.

30 And Solomon’s wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt.

31 For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about.

…

33 And he spake of trees, from the cedar tree that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall: he spake also of beasts, and of fowl, and of creeping things, and of fishes.

Did you catch that, Greg? No one else had the understanding of natural things (beasts, fowl, creeping things, fishes) that Solomon had. So the Bible clearly that understanding nature is hard. Why do you think it would be so easy? If it were easy, Solomon’s understanding would have been nothing special.

It is remarkable that God has permitted mankind to acquire the knowledge of nature that we have in the modern era. I believe that it is a working out of how He has created all of mankind in His image. Of course, it is our obligation to use that knowledge for His glory. We who are made in His image do not always use that knowledge wisely. May we grow in the wisdom we need.

Blessings on you and your hand and your family,

Chris Falter

6 Likes
57

Hi Greg,

I never responded to your question. So here goes…

I am as sure that the Earth has revolved about 4.5 billion times around the sun as I am sure that the North Pole was below freezing in January, year of our Lord 1927.

No one was there in 1927 A.D. No eyewitnesses. Yet I am 100% confident it was well below freezing.

How about you, Greg? Do you think the North Pole was a warm tropic in January 1927? How do you know whether it was freezing, since there was no one at the North Pole with a thermometer at the time?

And now I’m going to ask you to address a question I previously asked.

Blessings…

1 Like
58

Sorry Grog, i seem to be ganging up with the rest of them.
how about, did you hear about Galileo? The church put him in house arrest. threatened serious torture if he did not recant about the earth rotating about the sun. seemed to contradict scripture. About 3 hundred years later, he got forgiven, now they have a stature of Galileo in the Vatican. The story is in Wikipedia, or maybe you have an encyclopedia. The point is, science got off to a rocky start, with the church holding all the cards.
Then Darwin, who thought to be a preacher, got this job on a boat , and he looked at flowers and birds. And got to thinking. Because before, based on Aristotle, all life was in fixed genus and species. Darwin thought he was seeing cross over, change in forms of those rock solid divisions. And as he looked around he noticed that we look a lot like apes. He was swimming upstream, against the cultural tide. but it seemed like. . . a workable theory.
Evolution, by the way is in the bible. The offspring of Noah evolved into white, brown and black people between the time of the flood and the time of writing it down.

Since Darwin’s book, people have been putting things into the theory and it holds up to scrutiny. Geology had contributions, some fossils, but plate techtonics explains mountains, valleys, earthquakes, volcanos. lot of details showing age of earth. there are books called Roadside Geology of _______(state) for most states. find yours, walk around and look at the rocks. They are easy to read.
There are many books. One i saw recently called “your inner fish” available on amazon fo $2 plus shipping. starts with fish coming out of the water. finding those fossils. not hard to read.
That has to do with " is there evidence?"

How does this square with the bible?
What is important? I was reading that Moabites were the children of Lot’s daughters, incestuous. is that important? not so much to me.
What i find important is that compassion and forgiveness are required of us, in Isaiah, in Matthew.
Someone said " if Adam was not a special creation, then what are we?" Since i am doubtful about adam, i find a specialness from Jesus, that i am more important than Sparrows, and my receding hairline is noticed even by God. I find it important that God cares about us.

But making sense of, an exactly literal creation story or the temptation in the Garden of Eden, doesn’t work. on many levels.

Why do we try to make sense? well, i have children who ask simple questions, when they don’t know “your not supposed to ask that’. I have known people from other backgrounds (e.g.Laotians, remnants of Vietnam war) who might want to be some type of christian. They really like forgiveness and compassion. but " do we really have to believe the Adam and Eve story?”

So what is the important part of the bible? And i am lookiing for a couple bumper sticker answers. Do we all have to be circumcised, is slavery, as presented in the Bible, still OK? Do you let women talk in church? what is really important?

2 Likes
59

I found it through the biologos front page…I think you have to click on the link that asks the question, “Is there scientific evidence for evolution?” or something like that. This then leads to a side bar that asks if one wants more info and if so to check out that Nat Geo link.

60

I’d like to see the video. It appears that grog might not understand what the video is teaching.

1 Like