Coming from a public school, I know that we are very touchy on the subject of creationism. No, because evolution supposedly has been scientifically proved, lets just throw creationism out of the window. We cannot mention God at all in the public school system because it might offend someone. What about those that do believe and are being suppressed?
Now don't go thinking I'm a religious fanatic. We are so concerned with not offending anyone, but in that crusade, many are offended. In school we are taught evolution. In various history classes and english classes we are taught about Greek/Roman mythology, Islam, Voodoo, and tolerance of every other religion. But yet, we someone mentions Christianity or Catholicism, it viewed upon as a bad thing.
Evolution is the only thing allowed to be taught in science, because creationism "just couldn't have happened." But some scientist say that evolution, though a good theory, is not the only theory. Students should be exposed to a variety of different cultures, religions, and theories as to how we came about. Is it that big of a deal to say, "Class, in addition to evolution, some scientists disagree with it. They believe that somewhere, something created us." That's not promoting a religion, its promoting an alternate theory.
I remember back to my world history class, we talked for weeks about Greek/Roman mythology. There is even a mythology class offered in my school. We also discussed in great detail Islam and Buddhism. But, in my world history class, we talked about Christianity for about 15 minutes.
I'm not promoting religion in schools, especially not in public schools, but if we dont give the students the opportunity to learn and know about other cultures equally, then how are students to learn tolerance? If there are students who want to learn about creationism, add a class about theology. If you cant afford to add a class, offer something outside of school. Don't completely disregard something because its not "scientifically" proven. It took hundreds of years for it to be "scientifically" proven that the world is round....it may take years for creationism to have valid scientific proof. But if mythology, evolution, American Indian folklore, Islam and others have a place in our schools, then creationism deserves something.
in my 9th grade history class we did a unit on religion and we studied everything, God, Allah, Buddha, and many more. As long as you give each equal amount of time and don't lean one way or another showing a preference in religion I think its okay
But that doesn't justify teaching Creationism in a SCIENCE class. At all.
Exactly. You want to teach creationism in schools? Fine; put it in the mythology curriculum. Really, what is there to "teach" anyway?
". . . and remember class, the Judeo-Christian God loves you and created you in six days." Class over.
That sounds like a fun class.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
There is no reason Creationism shouldn't be taught in schools, but the way Kansas and Dover presented it was in the old Jon Scopes south setting. They are forced to teach proven theorms of science, but have to circumvent it with creationism or be labelled as immoral. Schools should be able to teach mythology in a theology or history class, but the preference should not be allowed to ascend beyond a mythology. Greek and Roman religion is a mythology. Islam is a mythology. Christianity is a mythology. Buddhism is a mythology.
Christianity is taught for about 15 minutes because most students in American public schools in a small town setting are already opened to the creation stories, and time should not be wasted when different mythologies are there, and students don't know as much about them. That's the teacher's call.
The "alternate theory" you promote is religion! I agree that theology is a viable class and should be taught in public schools. I was lucky enough to have the same world history curriculum where we discussed all different types of religions, Christianity included.
My problem lies in teaching intellegent design in science class alongside evolution. Although there are missing links in evolution, the overall theory obviously exists. Science has proven that. When science finds proof of intellegent design (the big bang theory was very simular minus the all powerful being but I believe this theory has been discredited) I will be more than happy to promote its teachings. Until then, let's stick to proven scientific fact in multiethnic public schools.
Intelligent design is not a fact. Neither is creationism. Christians can be offended by being forced to learn something that they don't want to, and won't believe. The same goes scientifically minded people who believe in intelligent design. I took a college biology class and we did a whole unit on intelligent design. I did all of the required assignments, but being a christian I felt like it was time learnig another theory, not fact. We learned about the big bang theory too. So I suppose I feel if people are open and willing to hear my theory, I shoud be open to learning other theories as well.
If it helps readers, the Catholic Church's official stance is not in true Creationism as stated in Biblical stories, but that the Genesis stories were written by Babylonian exiles as hopeful stories.
Curriculum in Catholic schools dictate that evolution be thouroughly taught in freshman biology. In the words of my teacher there: "It is a failure by humans to disinherit scientific fact. God gave us a mind, and the greatest compliment we can give God is to use it to find out new things."
However, in religious studies classes, the point made is that it doesn't matter what theory made the world. The point is to live in the present (a la progressivism, think of the present and the future.)
Obviously, none of this has any real bearing on the public school system, as Kansas and Dover is dominated by mostly fundamentalist protestants. But there should be some influence by this on the public schools.
I received this by email earlier today -- probably someone who read your post, xPitt.
------------------------------------------------
Hello.
This letter is to inform you that I teach a class on Genesis
to science teachers. The title of the course is "Moses &
Creation: Biblical Reality". It is a 15-hour class that tells
the truth about the first three chapters of Genesis, so that
the teachers won't be speaking in ignorance about what
Genesis is saying to mankind. Neither theology nor
secular science are anywhere close to knowing what
advanced scientific knowledge is contained in Genesis.
My name is Herman Cummings. I am the foremost terrestrial
authority on the book of Genesis. Due to the current pseudo
controversy between what is written in Genesis and the
conclusions of secular science, I believe my services are
most needed. I would come the site designated by the
local school or district to conduct the class.
I am the only person I know or ever heard of presently on
this Earth that is qualified to teach Biblical Creation. However,
"creation" is not the counterpart of the doctrine of evolution,
as most of humanity believes. Biblical Creation is the doctrine
that God created our Earth & universe (4.6 billion BC) and
deposited original life on this planet at that time. Since
Genesis does not tell us how the Earth was created,
"Creation" can't be taught. It would be the counterpart of
the "Big Bang" theory. However, Evolution is the doctrine
that simple life began to evolve (from an unknown beginning)
into complex life forms over many millions of years, into
the forms of life that we have presently in our world.
The counterpart of evolution is the correct interpretation of the
first two chapters of Genesis, which tells of the past
appearance and demise of various life forms over the course
of time, and the history of modern mankind. This is called
the "Observations of Moses", or "OM". Many school districts
are grappling with the doctrine of "Intelligent Design".
Unfortunately, "ID" is an inept and shallow doctrine that merely
says that life on Earth is too complex to have developed by
chance. It tells nothing about the 600 million year fossil record,
and how ancient life forms appeared, plus when and why many
became extinct.
The student is now left in a state of confusion because of what
unqualified people have "said" what the Bible teaches, and
what secular science has discovered. In reality, the doctrines
of evolution and "OM" are explaining the same thing,
acknowledging the same geologic periods of time, but "OM"
explains what happened and why it happened, from 4.6 billion
years ago until 4267 BC. There is agreement on when the life
forms perished, but new information is given in the class about
when those, and additional unknown, life forms were born.
After completing this course, the schoolteacher will be able to
resolve the conflict in students' minds about what they read in
Genesis, and scientific reality. The teachers will also be able
to answer most any question atheists or theists can think
of to ask. The course covers the periods of time before Earth
was created, the advents of prehistoric mankind, up until the
appearance of modern mankind. The students receive
"closure", and become more receptive to instruction, because
they don't feel like they are only being taught false conclusions.
This is not a course on teaching "creationism", but how to
convey the scientific information that Genesis has for mankind.
I've asked that the U.S. Department of Education be proactive
and sanction the issue of certificates for science teachers in an
effort to be reasonably sure that all teachers teach the same
material to all students. I've already written the governor and
members of the education committees of every state legislature.
I have hope that officials will introduce legislation that will
free the public schools to teach all viable theories of origins,
and explanations of the ancient history of life on Earth,
removing the threat of (atheist) lawsuits.
Sincerely,
Herman Cummings
PO Box 1745
Fortson GA, 31808-1745
Ephraim7@aol.com
(706) 662-2893
...and I could find absolutely no reason to credit his claim to be "the foremost terrestrial
authority on the book of Genesis," much less the "only person I know or ever heard of presently on this Earth that is qualified to teach Biblical Creation." This guy's name does pop up from time to time on various pro-creationist websites, but even most of the creationist websites that I found referred to this guy as a self-promoting crackpot.
percivale
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.
I'm sorry, but I have a hard time believing that the book of Genesis holds any "scientific facts" for man. Scientific fact is arrived at through the means of the scientific method, a form of study that has just recently been articulated and expounded upon. The Bible and the Scientific Method do not mesh. This does not mean that they both don't have something useful for us, but they are different modes of reaching a conclusion and therefore should be looked at as such.
It is for this reason that religion and science should remain seperate disciplines, as stated above. There will always be questions that one can answer better that the other because one speaks to humanity's subjective state while the other to our thirst for objective knowledge about the "outer" world.
I think that what is needed is a revamping of our cultural understanding of religion and what it suggests about humanity itself. For too long we have confused subjective, intuitive understanding for objective knowledge via myths regarding a higher being. I am not using myth in its derogatory meaning by supposing that it is a fabrication or something utterly unreal, but instead in the enlightened sense of the word, suggesting a way of pursuing a knowledge unlimited by reason. It is to this realm that religion and spirituality belong. I think as humanity progresses in its evolution and thinking we will come to understand that we will always find commonalities between religion and science because, at the core, they are both different ways of understanding our lives and reality. But, these different modes belong in different spheres of human action in that the avenues pursued by both are different than the other.
Having said this I would agree with the suggestion to have a mandatory class in world religions that gives equal time to all of the world's spiritual beliefs and let the students make up there own mind.
Hi.
Are you an expert on what Genesis is conveying to mankind? If you have not been taught the facts (as of yet), you are not qualified to make such remarks. Your response conveys a closed mind, rather than that which is open to the facts of reality.
Herman
After doing a bit of research on the science of intelligent design, I've found that the main argument is based on the making holes in evolution. Disproving one theory (especially one that has been replicated in experiment) is not a way to prove another ( especially one that is not even the inverse). Scientific evidence for ID hinges on mechanical approximations, including the spatial size of the universe, the number of particles in it, and the precise beginning of time. These three approximations together get an approximate error of 1*10^150 (yes, that's a 1 with 150 zeroes.) No scientist has found an experiment that could prove God exists, only speculation. Remember that theory says a bumblebee is simply incapable of flying based on Newtonian mechanics, but (obviously) experiment proves otherwise.
In short, broaden your horizens, but do it outside of a non-research science class.
And on top of that, if we are to take Genesis and the prophetic ages literally, then the world would have been created in "4004 B.C. at precisely 9 o'clock in the morning."
Ever hear of dinosaurs? Carbon dating? the world is older than 6009 years.
Ya, and a fourty year old pepsi can was carbon dated to over a thousand years old.
I have not been able to find anything online about this pepsi can, but several other websites do mention other "controversies" about carbon dating. These are all well known effects that scientists test for and verify. If you are actually interested in reading what this means in terms of bogus claims I recommend the following ressources:
On radiometric dating and the basic controversies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversy_on_Radiometric_dating
For a detailed discussion of various other "obviously false" results and their explanations:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD010.html
Going to the "Next Claim" links will give you a taste of various controversies.
Regardless of whether humanity truly evolved from blobs of jelly and monkeys, Creationists cannot prevail in the ongoing debate about our origins. Their position is fatally flawed. You see, the Creationist position fundamentally relies upon the premise that the Judeo-Christian Bible is the Word of God. If it’s not; if the Bible is just a book, then there is no Creationist position. Recently, a lawyer embarked upon a mission to become the greatest Christian on the planet. In his quest he made a profound discovery. He discovered that the Bible is unequivocally not the Word of God. His argument is compelling. After reading his thesis, I am both shocked and embarrassed that I spent my whole life as a Christian and a Creationist. And while his thesis does not invalidate the so-called theory of “Intelligent Design,
I read this blog post because it made it on google news (good job!), and I want to point out a likely reason why Christianity isn't discussed very much in schools. As you pointed out, there is discussion of Greek/Roman mythology, Islam, Buddhism. The problem is that all those are approached as mythologies. Many many Christians would take far greater offense to their beliefs being represented as mythological in the classroom than currently take offense at their beliefs not being thoroughly covered.
In addition, the vast majority of Americans are quite well schooled in the basic stories/myths and values of Christianity, due to the essentially Christian nature of our mores and laws (with, of course, a number of important exceptions), whereas our understanding of Islam is tainted by the fanatics that belong to groups such as Al Qaeda, while our understanding of Buddhism or Hinduism is essentially nonexistent. Thus, if broadening of horizons is the issue at school, and taking into account that we have a limited number of hours, are we not better served by covering topics that most people are most likely unfamiliar with?
Wow. This blog goes from Science class to History class?? Should we teach how the the space aliens colonized South America and started the Human race off? And how a large bird flew through the sky and gave birth to the Moon and Earth? In Science Class? That is just as wacky a suggestion as teaching that some guy collected all the animals in the world, sailed around for 40 days, and then placed all the Kangaroos on Austrailia, Pumas in South America, Lions in Africa, Etc. until they were all back on their own islands and continents? Clearly, a crop of confused kids we would produce. Progressive NOT.
I believe that creationism should be taught, but in its proper spot, with the other creation myths from other cultures in a social science or mythology class. I believe that you can learn a lot about a culture from their myths, but a biology or other science class is not the place to teach any creation myths from any culture. Evolution is the only theory of how humans came into being that has any amount of scientific proof behind it.
Creationism, intelligent design, or whatever they decide to call it, is a religious belief. Religious beliefs are not science. Therefore, religious beliefs should not be taught in a science class.
If you want to learn about religious beliefs such as creationism, go to a religious establishment. Religion does not belong in schools, or governments for that matter. If you would like to know what happens when religion interferes with government, look at Iran.
Is it any wonder that Adam was forbidden to eat from the "tree of knowledge"?! I wonder if Herman Cummings is familiar with Argumentum ad Assertion Repetitio ad Nauseam. I'm sure he is.... Herman Cummings is the type of person that doesn't care about anything but his religious agenda. He can't reconcile with evolutionary science because it proves without a doubt that the Genesis account is nothing more than mythology. In rational, intelligent human beings, when they learn a fact that is in direct conflict with a held belief, they reevaluate that belief and likely reject it as untrue. However, people like Herman Cummings act as if they do not want to be bothered with facts. These are some of the most dangerous and psychologically unstable people on the planet. They're willingly being controlled by a schizophrenic mind that allows both fact and fiction, truths and mythology to govern their actions. They knowingly let this unstable mind exist and use it to evaluate their friends and neighbors, other groups (religious or not) and other countries. Rather than seeking help for their condition, they seek others exhibiting these same characteristics and form groups with them. Then they become 6 to 4 pro-creation on a state board of education and risk a child’s future for their religious agenda. Good going Herman. You're a real humanitarian.
"But, in my world history class, we talked about Christianity for about 15 minutes. "
i find that extremely hard to believe, considering how much of a role the church played in historical events from even roman times up throught the Renaissance and beyond. in my european history class we probably mentioned the christian church at least once a day.
--stacie
Although I mostly agree with you, I think that it's probably just a better idea to let kids learn about religion on their own. I took a class recently in which the teacher spoke about Islam and other religions, but her facts were completely jumbled. Being Muslim myself, rather than feeling others were being informed, I felt as if they were only being dumbed down. As if we don't have enough ignorance in this world as it is. If someone is truly interested in learning more about religion, they have many other (probably more accurate) resources available to them.
...with the biblical creation story being taught alongside and in the same context as any of the other mythological stories that we study for their cultural value. But, to suggest that biblical creationism should be taught as an "alternative" to science is to frankly pretend that the judaeo-christian creation myth has any scientific credibility at all, when nothing could be farther from the truth.
The reason that the Theory of Evolution is taught in biology classes, is that the Theory represents the predominant scientific consensus and interpretation of the extant evidence. You say that "it may take years for creationism to have valid scientific proof" (which is rather humorous, really, since the biblical creation story has been around for thousands of years longer than the Theory of Evolution), and I respond by saying that when your pet theory does in fact come up with some actual evidence, then would be the time to make your case. Until that happens, however, your hypothesis hasn't earned the "right" to be taught in science classrooms.
percivale
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.
If science can say that everything we know and love was created because of random shit events, chance and an explosion, then I think its right alright for you to say that God did it too. There is no sure way that we got here, everything is just a theory when it comes to science. In 100 years, everything we take as truth now will be proven otherwise anyway.
~ I trust my soul, my only goal is just to be! ~
RENT
The difference between god and science is that there is evidence to back up scientific beliefs. There is no similar evidence for religion.
"Every man makes a god of his own desire."
-Virgil
Just add Christianity into your school's mythology class and it all works out perfectly.
-Tim
"It costs nothing to be honest, loyal, and true."
If a kid wants to learn about creationism or intelligent design they should go to church or a religous private school. The goal of public school is to teach kids a general education. Since creationism and intelligent design are based on facts they shouldn't be included in Science curriculum. They should be placed in a mythology class if they're to be included in curriculum.