Evolution in the classroom - great NY Times article

You've probably already seen the article from this past Saturday's NY Times: A Teacher on the Front Line as Faith and Science Clash, by Amy Harmon.

David Campbell, the Florida biology teacher portrayed in the piece, deserves our gratitude for his persistence in defense of facing the facts. Equally laudable are his tact and his obvious concern for his students. The latter two qualities are clearly important in his efforts to wean the students off the creationist wishful thinking that they've been infected with by their parents and churches.

Pulitzer, perhaps?

Comments

[Randy Meadows]

D.C.
Good grief!! I believe the statement, "If this is Christianity's friend, it doesn't need any enemies!!! applies to a lot of your commentaries. Every chance you get you try to erode away beliefs based on faith that you explain as exposing the truth.

I'm one of those wishful thinking parents that taught creationism to my children. Of course we can't prove it and God planned a lot of things that way. If we could prove where would faith come in?

I know you've heard this one before, but it actually takes more faith to believe the happenstance associated with evolution than it does to believe there is a creator responsible for everything. Where did the galaxies come from? How about the earth and the phenomenal way it orbits around the sun to provide seasons, day and night. Spectacular happenstance don't you think?

From the article you reference, “Is there a God?” shot back a boy near the window.

“Good,” said Mr. Campbell, an Anglican who attends church most Sundays. “Can’t test it. Can’t prove it, can’t disprove it. It’s not a question for science.”

Okay, using his own words, can't disprove that a God exists that created the entire world, food chain, etc. Don't mean this personally, but "oh yea, of little faith."

[Randy Meadows]

DC
After reading your essay on why you call yourself a Christian..... I'd like to withdraw my post above.
I'll pray for you, but if you don't repent from this nonsense, you'll not be going to see Jesus. I am not pleased to tell you this, but you really need to discard your pride and listen - not to me, but to your Father.
I think you've been blessed and cursed at the same time. Blessed with a very high intellect, but cursed with a feeling of superiority and a great amount of pride that won't allow you to listen to those trying to warn you. One of the things I don't believe in, is coincidences. It wasn't a coincidence that I found your website. This is a planned interaction where God is again knocking on the door of your heart. I hope you'll let Him all the way in.
Maybe your background in science makes it hard to imagine that God can do anything and that He really doesn't need us to be able to prove it or even fully understand it, but just to believe. You can't put him on the same level as a human.
Don't let pride stand in the way of an eternity with Him.

[D. C. Toedt]

Randy Meadows writes:

I know you've heard this one before, but it actually takes more faith to believe the happenstance associated with evolution than it does to believe there is a creator responsible for everything. Where did the galaxies come from? How about the earth and the phenomenal way it orbits around the sun to provide seasons, day and night. Spectacular happenstance don't you think?

Randy, I see that in your later post you withdrew your comment. Even so, I think it's important to note I do indeed "believe there is a creator responsible for everything," as you say.

Where we disagree is that to me, the evidence points unmistakably to a very different model of how the Creator has been going about his work. See some of my prior posts listed in the right-hand column under the heading Building a universe," for example:

• The Continuing Creation: Not Carpentry, But Bonsai
  
• Creation: A Titanic Set of Processes That Continues Today
  
• How Do We Know There's a God?
  
• Progress, Hope, and Trust in God: A Thought Experiment
  

----------------------

Randy writes:

Maybe your background in science makes it hard to imagine that God can do anything and that He really doesn't need us to be able to prove it or even fully understand it, but just to believe. You can't put him on the same level as a human.

Don't let pride stand in the way of an eternity with Him. [Emphasis added]

Randy, it's worth exploring just who is (probably unintentionally) guilty of pride. I don't flatter myself that God wants me "just to believe"; that strikes me as a prideful rationalization for believing what I want to believe even in the absence of supporting evidence. It also seems dangerously close to blasphemy to assert that anyone possesses definitive knowledge of God's mind and will for the here and now.

(On a side note, it's likewise close to blasphemy to assert that God's mind and will is the same for all places and times; see generally my post, Can the Holy Spirit Contradict Himself? as well as Continuing revelation might be like crossing the street.)

Certainly there are things that I believe or hope to be true but can't support with evidence. An example is my hope of a happy life after death. I might willingly make a big bet on such a belief — if the bet will affect only my own well-being. But the commandment to seek the best for my neighbor as I do for myself requires me to be cautious about making such bets when it's other people's lives that will be affected — and even more so when the belief in question isn't demonstrably coherent with what we've observed from the actual reality God created. (Cf. Paul's comment in Romans 1.20 about God's nature being revealed in what he has created.)

To take a current example: Many consenting adults are not willing to make the same bets about lifelong committed same-sex unions that our forefathers did. I've come around to the view that, absent a showing of likely harm — and speculation about danger to one's immortal soul doesn't qualify — the church should not be refusing to bless these adults' relationships nor excluding them from episcopal ordination and ministry.

(The approach I describe above, incidentally, follows from Deut. 18.21-22: If what a prophet proclaims doesn't come to pass or proves not to be true, his proclamation was not something the LORD told him to say, and he shouldn't be feared.)

--------------

As far as for putting God on the same level as a human goes: I think the problem is exactly the opposite.

It seems to me that you guys are elevating humanity to an undeserved prominence in the creation. It reminds me of how James and John the sons of Zebedee (and their mother!) pestered Jesus to put them at his left- and right hands when he came into his kingdom.

See also my post from a few weeks ago, NT Wright's Lambeth lecture about scriptural authority reveals his exaggerated view of humanity's importance. I stand by my closing comment in that essay: "At best, this is self-indulgence; at worst, a breach of the First Commandment."

--------------

I'm glad you're visiting here; it's very useful for both of us to have to articulate our positions.

[B. Gregory]

I have to say, as one who was raised in a moderate Baptist church committed to the ideals of "The Way" and as one who is a practicing Ph.D. research scientist, I am quite confused by Randy's rhetoric. I have looked closely at the scientific evidence for evolution, and in particular that for human evolution, and the evidence is unmistakable. There is no other scientific theory which explains the diversity of life on our planet as completely as evolution. In fact, in terms of supporting evidence, there is SIGNIFICANTLY MORE evidence supporting the scientifc case for evolution than there is for any other single scientific theory to date, including that for the earth traveling around the sun. The evidence for evolution can be found in areas as diverse as comparative biology, molecular biology, and genetics. I would assume that Randy doesn't question whether the earth travels around the sun.

I find it troubling that Randy is so willing to put all his trust in a contention which is not only NOT supported by any evidence, but is controverted by ALL experimental observations - and call that trust "faith". This is a misuse of the meaning of "faith," as he has supplanted his own God-given reasoning faculties for blind belief. (St. Augustine is probably rolling over in his grave.) However, Randy is not alone - many biblical literalists use the concept of "evidence" when it supports their religious convictions, and when it doesn't, rely on the argument of "faith". The real problem is that people like Randy really believe that it's all about "belief," and not about action. This is absolutely contrary to the Jesus portrayed in the Gospels, as nearly all of Jesus's utterings involve how one is supposed to live their lives, not about what they are supposed to believe.

The scientific method. This is the process that led to the development of evolutionary theory, and it is used by thousands upon thousands of practicing scientists around the world everyday like myself. This process is the same one that has given us virtually every modern luxury, from automobiles, to computers, to ipods, to air-conditioning, to clean drinking water, and the list goes on and on and on. If Randy distrusts the scientific method so much why does he still drive to work and to the grocery store? Why does he use his computer to send posts to blogs such as this one?

"The truth will set you free."

[Randy Meadows]

Gentleman, maybe you misunderstood me or maybe I didn't articulate my points clearly. It's not that I don't value science, I do. I work for the number one chemical company in the world. I have seen the extraordinary value that science has contributed to the life we have today.
The talents of creativity, invention and perseverance coupled with the human brain have produced tremendous advances for our civilization and the environment in which we live.
Now, having said that, where we must depart philosophically, is I believe that God created everything at the start or as the bible says, "in the beginning." I do believe that we humans have evolved in minor ways, i.e. height, small physiological changes over many centuries. I just don't believe that we came from single cells. Sorry, don't buy it. And "B" I'm not sure what you meant when you said, "The real problem is that people like Randy really believe that it's all about "belief," and not about action." I do believe and I also believe in action. I am a very active believer. I am very involved in the pro-life movement, because yes, I believe that God does create life and that we have no right to destroy innocent human life. I am also very involved with Habitat for Humanity, as well as a Sunday School teacher in my church.
I don't need "evidence" as you suggested above, I just believe. And yes, I believe in things you might think are hokey, like the virgin birth, that when Moses raised his staff, the Red Sea really did part and the most important thing I believe is that Jesus is the son of God, He is a member of the trinity and He is coming back. Sorry if that blew you away.