How were you taught Evolution?

justlookinla said:

Why are you so deceitful to suggest that this.....

"

​

all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations"

Agrees with this....

Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

Click to expand...

Because I think they agree. Are you completely unable to process the fact that not everyone in the world thinks exactly like you? Have you by any chance ever been diagnosed with some sort of mental illness?

justlookinla said:

God isn't allowed in this naturalistic process....

"all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations"

Click to expand...

Is too.

No, I don't agree that humanity was created solely, completely, totally and only by naturalistic processes acting on a single life form from long long ago.

Click to expand...

No one cares whether you agree. We just want you to stop repeating falsehoods about other people's beliefs.

Betcha its not macro evolution.

Click to expand...

Betcha it is (some of the time).

I'm surprised that you would believe that God as creator would be a delusion.

Click to expand...

I don't. What's a delusion is your belief about what I believe.

Atheos canadensis said:

Would you please directly address the fact that this allegedly atheist viewpoint is taught in Catholic schools?

Click to expand...

There is no fact. You are apparently under the delusion that Catholic schools teach a creationist viewpoint contrary to Catholic doctrine.

From catholic.com......


The Catholic Church doesn't teach that mankind is the creation of solely, completely, only naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago. Your 'fact' isn't a fact.

sfs said:

Because I think they agree. Are you completely unable to process the fact that not everyone in the world thinks exactly like you? Have you by any chance ever been diagnosed with some sort of mental illness?

Click to expand...

Would you point out where John 1:3 is permitted or allowed in the following creationist viewpoint.....

justlookinla said:

Would you point out where John 1:3 is permitted or allowed in the following creationist viewpoint.....

"all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations"​

Click to expand...

He can't. The Darwinist brainwashing has taken hold of him, it's far too strong for any logic to pass through his mind at this point. He's just going to go on, holding his ridiculous, contradictory beliefs. Trying to serve two master - God and Darwin.

sfs said:

I guess the answer is that your brain just shuts down. To me, your first quote very much permits your second quote to be true. Now you claim not only that you disagree (which is fine), but that my belief does not exist. And I'd really like you to tell me why you are so arrogant as to tell me what I believe.

Click to expand...

The only arrogance I see here is you, going against the clear word of your Creator.

crazyforgod1212 said:

The only arrogance I see here is you, going against the clear word of your Creator.

Click to expand...

Except we don't believe it to be the word of any deity, just like you don't view the Greeks as right or Hindus as right. We aren't pitting ourselves against anything remotely close to a deity, because from our perspective they don't exist. Your ideal of a creator is as real to me as Zeus is to you, maybe even less.

crazyforgod1212 said:

The only arrogance I see here is you, going against the clear word of your Creator.

Click to expand...

It might help if you thought about it a little, how about your arrogance in going against the clear word of all the other creators? or do you dismiss them all as being just stories? do you even give them a second thought? give one good reason why anyone should give your myth any more thought than you give their myths?

justlookinla said:

No humanity. Now humanity. Explain.

Click to expand...

Evolution by means of natural selection - started by God.

Geez, how difficult is this for you to grasp? When I put a DVD in the player, it starts a process of all the different parts moving, the player running certain software, sending signals, the TV set interpreting them, displaying the image on the screen and producing sounds. And I I did was push the little button that makes the tray close.

Why do you not see that a similar thing can happen with God guiding evolution?

justlookinla said:

There is no fact. You are apparently under the delusion that Catholic schools teach a creationist viewpoint contrary to Catholic doctrine.

From catholic.com......

"Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.

While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution."​

The Catholic Church doesn't teach that mankind is the creation of solely, completely, only naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago. Your 'fact' isn't a fact.

Click to expand...

And since you ignored my the last time I asked, where did this ONLY come from?

crazyforgod1212 said:

The only arrogance I see here is you, going against the clear word of your Creator.

Click to expand...

Boy, are you gonna get it when Wotan finds out about you....!

I meandered onto this thread and breezily answered the question based on the header, and my first answer was incomplete, and so I want to add onto it here before addressing your questions in the quotes below. I really should have explained that much of what I’ve learned about evolution has been taught outside of classrooms, but significantly influenced my understanding of it in academic settings. As mentioned previously, I first learned the meaning of evolution when Dr. Francis Collins spoke about theistic evolution at my church when I was eight, and that sermon helped to instill the belief that science and religion can have a positive and meaningful relationship. I first learned evolution from a secular perspective that same year when we were in Sydney and ducked into the Australian Museum on an oppressively hot day to escape the heat, and then ended up spending hours there taking in the exhibitions. They really explained evolution and the scientific beliefs regarding the origins of life in an engaging way that made it interesting and simple for my brothers and me to understand. I lived in Washington, DC from ages five through twelve, and the Smithsonian museums were like huge classrooms to me in a way. I was there all the time with my family, on field-trips, at their summer camps, and so forth, and after the experience in Sydney I took more interest in the the National Natural History Museum. My 7th grade science class had a special tour of the Hall of Human Origins just after it was opened in 2010, and then had several lessons based on the educational program guides the museum provides teachers. My family and I also attended their public programs. This exhibit and all the related lessons, seminars, and events was enriching and significant in building up my foundational understanding of both the scientific hypotheses of the origins of life itself and the emergence and essence of humanity. Books I've read by Dr. Collins, Matt Ridley, Neil Shubin, and Jared Diamond have also been very educational.

justlookinla said:

In your education so far, did any of your professors attribute the creation of life (not abiogenesis) from one single life form from long long ago, to the complexity and variety of life we observe today to anything but solely naturalistic processes?

Click to expand...

Yes. When we lived in DC I went to the National Cathedral School, which is an Episcopalian all-girls school affiliated with The National Cathedral, and my 7th grade science teacher shared her own beliefs about God being the creator of life. We also discussed the various belief systems about the origins of life based on what was taught in the lesson plans from the Smithsonian, and girls shared our own ideas. The theory of evolution wasn’t typically taught in the 7th grade, but we were taking advantage of the special exhibition, and it was a lively, fun way to end the school year. My family moved to LA that summer and I’ve attended a 7-12 private independent school (not affiliated with any religion) ever since. Though we touched upon evolution and the origins of life at NCS, my academic education on evolution really began in 9th grade biology. We learned that evolution theory is about how life changed after its origin, and so we never studied the hypotheses on the origins of life in that class. When you previously asked if all teachings relating the origins of life were attributed to a naturalistic process, I was really extrapolating beyond what’s actually been taught in my science classes that have taught evolution. Based upon my experiences at the museum exhibitions regarding the origins of life and the books I've read I built a bridge in my mind between that and lessons in classes and wrote my response. I sort of feel like you manipulated my response to suit your agenda, and so I’m trying to use more care now.

One chapter in my 10th grade AP Environmental Science class had a component relating to the origins of life. In the classroom we solely focused on the geophysical, the chemical, and the biological hypotheses. As mentioned previously, my teacher never discussed the supernatural while teaching natural evolution and abiogenesis but certainly didn’t dissuade us from having any personal beliefs in a deity being responsible for the creation of life. There was no litmus test. I just looked again and the textbook does very briefly explain the Theory of Special Creation (the ones ascribed to by most world religions), Theory of Spontaneous Generation, the Theory of Catastrophism, and the Cosmozoic Theory. It’s a digital textbook (on an iPad) and you can click on links to find more information if you choose. The same textbook is used at most public schools as well as at other private schools.

This past year I took Pharmacology and we only studied evolution in relation to pharmacological / biomedical research, like viral evolution for viral oncology. Once again we never studied the origins of life. I’ve only truly been taught that, beyond just that one APES component, in the current class I’m taking at UCLA. It hasn’t been taught as conclusive, inconvertible fact, but was phrased as “why do we think life originally evolved from non-living materials on this planet?” Then we discussed how that might have occurred. We’ve also learned why creationism is not a scientific alternative to evolution. The word scientific is a very important qualifier. It leaves the doors to theological alternatives open for us to enter through and explore if we choose. Though I and other high schoolers have been permitted to take this class, it’s a class for college students and taught on UCLA’s campus. It’s not a requirement for any high school student, and our parents pay for the tuition. So it's not like we're "kiddos" less experienced with critical independent thinking forced into this class.

The class at my school that devotes the most time to teaching evolution and the origins of life is AP Biology, but I’m taking AP Physics this upcoming year. My brother took AP Biology at St. Alban’s, which is the all-boys brother school to NCS, and out of curiosity I asked him your question about “atheistic creationism.” It is a Christian school, and yet they use the same textbook by Pearson that we have at my school, and they taught the class from the same secular perspective as it's taught at the majority of schools whether they be public, private, parochial, online, or brick and mortar. Whereas my 7th grade teacher did share her Christian views in class, he said his science teachers at St. Albans did not. They just focused on teaching science lessons based on the most substantiated, reputable scientific evidence. He said it seems like you’re making secularism, naturalism, and atheism synonymous with one another when they are not. Going by your unique definition, St. Alban’s, a Christian school that is on the same grounds at the THE National Cathedral, is teaching atheism by teaching evolution and hypotheses on the origins of life the way we're taught it at my school (i.e., solely naturalistic), when they most assuredly are not. They just teach science in science classes, theology in religion classes, and humanity in history and philosophy classes. I don’t know how familiar you are with AP classes, but they are college-level classes you take in high school, and at the end of the year everyone takes a standardized exam to potentially earn college credit based on your score. The College Board suggests the curriculum for the classes. I have friends at NCS, at Episcopal and Catholic schools here in LA, and at public schools who've taken the same AP classes I have and my brother has, and the classes are taught similarly. It's quite possible that people have disagreed with the material taught in their AP and other science classes. The AP exam and the majority of other tests aren't about an affirmation of agreement but a demonstration of mastery of the material that was taught. I mean, in my World Religions class I had tests relating to Islamic doctrine, Jainism, Buddhism, and so forth, and the tests were not about me believing in those religions but in showing that I learned what was taught. Simple as that.

justlookinla said:

This science-based naturalistic perspective, was it presenting humanity, for example, as anything other than a life form created entirely, solely, by naturalistic mechanisms?

Click to expand...

We've never specifically, directly studied the creation of humanity in any science class besides the discussions based on the Smithsonian material in the 7th grade. As explained above, we've studied hypotheses about the origins of life - not humanity - in some classes and then how humans evolved and are still evolving in others, but it hasn't been one flowing study about the origin of humanity in my classes so far.

justlookinla said:

I understand that God wasn't specifically credited or denied in your science class. It would be very surprising if that happened. My questions are concerning the teaching as a fact, without question, that all of life we observe today is solely due to naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago.

Click to expand...

Nope. My teachers and my current professor have stated that there is so much about the origins of life that scientists do not conclusively know, so there are mannnnnnnnnny open questions. The evidence about the evolution of life after its inception is substantial, but our knowledge of it will continue to evolve. They’ve said that the mechanism by which life began on Earth isn’t known; it’s hypothesized. My dad is an oncologist and has said that though they have made significant strides in understanding the 200+ diseases that are cancer in modern medicine, so much of it still unknown, which the primary reason a cure has remained elusive. If the best and the brightest doctors and researches around the world are unable to conclusively know everything about cancer because of its complexity, it’s understandable to me there aren’t categorical answers about the origins of life. "We don't know, but this is what we think / believe based on this evidence" is more honest to me than a claim about an incontrovertible scientific truth that lacks the scientific evidence to substantiate it.

justlookinla said:

Yes, it's our personal choice as to our belief or disbelief in God. And I couldn't agree more that science classes need to rely on scientific evidence.

Click to expand...

I believe most science classes do rely upon scientific evidence. I know that college professors review the textbooks most frequently used in the high school classes of their applicants and students to assess their quality and assure we've received the necessary preparation for those subjects at the college level. If parents or students feel like their education is lacking they can take the initiative to add supplementary lessons at home. I've read about theistic evolution on my own just by checking out Dr. Collins books and getting suggestions for others on Goodreads. I don't want or need it to be taught at school. I’m about to fall asleep now but if you’re interested I can share with you a bit later on about two friends who’ve taken science classes based on A Beka and Apologia textbooks and then explain why their experiences have made me so grateful I am taking straightforward, uncluttered, evidence-based science classes. I like that what I've been taught in my science classes matches up with what is taught in the natural history museums we've been to around the world, regardless of the dominant religious and political ideologies of the country where they're located.

OK. So now that I've hopefully answered your questions sufficiently, I have a question for you! If YOU were in charge of setting standards for science education in high schools what would you want to be taught, and why? Could you please just give a clear explanation without doublespeak? I’m sorry if this is a repetitive question. I haven’t read through all the threads and posts here. And my gosh, I’m sorry this post is so absurdly long and rambly. Peeps, my apologies for your sore eyes and for taking up so much space. I am sunburned and can’t sleep so I just typed away. Oh geez. If anyone actually reads all of this, thank youuuuu. Oh, and I hope this actually made sense and isn't riddled with typos. It's after 3AM here and my brain started to fall asleep an hour ago.

justlookinla said:

No humanity. Now humanity. Explain.

Click to expand...

KTS said:

Evolution by means of natural selection - started by God.

Geez, how difficult is this for you to grasp? When I put a DVD in the player, it starts a process of all the different parts moving, the player running certain software, sending signals, the TV set interpreting them, displaying the image on the screen and producing sounds. And I I did was push the little button that makes the tray close.

Why do you not see that a similar thing can happen with God guiding evolution?

Click to expand...

Evolution by means of natural selection - started by God.
Evolution by means of natural selection - started by Zeus.
Evolution by means of natural selection - started by 'you pick one'.

Can you see the DVD and the player? can you see God? Geez, how difficult is this for you to grasp? 'no ticky no laundry',
no see God no believe in God, no see FSM no believe in FSM, no see Allah no believe in Allah, no see Bigfoot no believe in Bigfoot.

justlookinla said:

Point out where anything other than the view that humanity is the creation of anything other than totally, completely, solely, naturalistic mechanisms.

"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations"​

No Christian accepts the view that they are a creation of only, totally, completely, solely naturalistic processes acting on a single life form from long long ago.

Click to expand...

Show where in that quote it is stated that Darwinism is "only, totally, completely, solely, naturalistic mechanisms.

It is amazing that you continue to use a definition that does not in the least support your ideas.

Dizredux

KTS said:

Evolution by means of natural selection - started by God.

Geez, how difficult is this for you to grasp? When I put a DVD in the player, it starts a process of all the different parts moving, the player running certain software, sending signals, the TV set interpreting them, displaying the image on the screen and producing sounds. And I I did was push the little button that makes the tray close.

Why do you not see that a similar thing can happen with God guiding evolution?

Click to expand...

Because Darwinists have never demonstrated that such a thing is what actually happens. Why would God set up a system that violates his very laws?

crazyforgod1212 said:

Because Darwinists have never demonstrated that such a thing is what actually happens. Why would God set up a system that violates his very laws?

Click to expand...

Good question, why would god make it so that all we observe suggests events contradictory to the bible if it intended the bible to be taken literally?

LittleLambofJesus said:

The ignore function can be a blessing at times.
Which leads me to ask if I am also on someone's ignore list here......

Click to expand...

I didn't use the ignore function until several days ago and indeed, it comes in mighty handy.