Darwin or Design?

-A A +A
By Staff Brunswick Beacon

By Robert A. Weathers, pastor

First Baptist Church

Guest Columnist

Evolution. There. I said it. And my brain didn’t melt, the world did not disintegrate, and most importantly, I didn’t get fired.

So why is it Darwinists think if they utter the word “creation” in the classroom their pristine reality will collapse and they will suddenly be branded as anti-intellectual?

Among evangelical Christians, the theory of evolution raises hackles. And Darwinists get equally rankled when creationism is considered. Our county has reverberated lately with this controversy, as people choose sides over the teaching of creationism in public schools.

The debate was rekindled at a Sept. 16 Brunswick County Board of Education meeting, and school board members, science teachers and even clergy have taken sides. Those who oppose the teaching of creationism argue evolution is about science and creation is about faith, and the public school science lab is no place for faith-based teaching. At least, not in Brunswick County.

The crackling controversy has since flamed into a blaze attracting even national attention, especially on the Internet.

I would like to weigh in, perhaps to add some clarity to the discussion because, frankly, if the press coverage is even nearly accurate, both sides have plundered the popular stockpile of misinformation on the subject and have, therefore, failed to have a healthy and reasonable discussion on a topic crucial to our children.

That’s what truly matters. What is best for our children? If they are fed on an evolution-only science curriculum, are they really getting the best evidence for the origins of life? My answer, not surprisingly, is no. Here’s why.

Darwinism has sustained its grip on the science classroom in the public schools because of five fallacies circulating in this debate. Exposing these fallacies and reconsidering the teaching of an evolution-only curriculum can only be good for our kids.

Fallacy No. 1: “Evolution is an absolute fact.” Actually, that statement is partly true. Biological creatures mutate and adapt with their changing world. This is called microevolution. It occurs within species lines and, actually, it is not unbiblical.

The Bible portrays God creating creatures as particular species and gives no indication that these species would never change within their own lines (Gen. 2:19). But when the term evolution is used in the present debate, most people mean Darwinism.

Darwinism is an ideology that promotes macroevolution, the belief mutations can cross species lines and even produce new species. That is, given enough time, a primate, for instance, could become a human.

For evangelical Christians, that is where the rub comes. Macroevolution is simply incompatible with a Biblical worldview.

Fallacy No. 2: “Scientific theories are unchanging and absolute.” For generations, scientists have known their theories must undergo changes, or “paradigm shifts,” when new evidence is discovered.

The unwillingness to adjust to the evidence of design offered by genetics is a type of legalism and is dishonest to our students.

Fallacy No. 3: “Creationism is religious philosophy, but evolution is science.” Double standard, plain and simple, but it is one of the most popular ideas trumpeted in this debate because it seems to verify a dichotomy between science and faith. Philosophies always undergird scientific theories and methods. Creationism is grounded in theism. Darwinism is grounded in naturalism. And these are two distinct worldviews.

Fallacy No. 4: “All reputable scientists believe in Darwinian evolution.” Not so. For decades, scientists have disagreed over the viability of Darwinism, and in the face of DNA evidence, the dissent is growing.

Check out the 700 scientists who have signed a document registering their disagreement with Darwinism at www.dissentfromdarwin.org.

Fallacy No. 5: “To teach Intelligent Design is to teach religion.” For years, scientists, atheists and non-atheists alike, have claimed the science of genetics challenges Darwinism. Many of these scientists believe DNA evidence screams nature is invested with design.

The official name for this scientific theory is now Intelligent Design (ID). ID is a scientific theory to answer what Darwinism cannot address: How did so much information get into biological systems?

Information is lost, not gained, in a macromutation, and yet all organisms require and sustain astronomical amounts of information in their DNA. How does Darwinism explain that? It cannot. So ID theorists do. Our children need to hear these problems and explanations.

That is what scientific discovery is all about.

In every other realm of life, and even in virtues taught in public schools, our children are led to believe everything with design had a designer, but in the science classroom, they are taught design came about by accident. Such a contradiction is illogical and teaching it is irresponsible; and not scientific.

Our children should learn to think. And they should hear the truth, especially in our tax-funded public schools.