Teaching Children Evolution

[platzapS]

Mods, if this belongs in the Science forum, you may move it. However, I believed this was more relevant to parenting and would like answers from concerned parents rather than people in the creation/evolution debate.

I am fascinated by the subject, but I was wondering--what do you teach your children about the theory of evolution? Would you have them learn it in science classes? Would you tell your children your own opinions? I would love anything you have to say.

 

[draper]

Well if your kids go to a Catholic school they certainly won't learn anything about it. The only reason it was ever mentioned in my school was because I asked questions.

 

[Beckijhn]

My younger two kids didn't formally learn it until this year - My oldest covered it last year. We have learned creation science from the start. This last year we started Apologia General Science, and Stream of Civilization for History. Both cover Evolution and Creation side by side in a compare and contrast method.

If they went to public school there's not a lot I could do to keep them from it. It is now being taught as a law and though there is a section specifically ON evolution, it is woven throughout the whole subject.

My kids (that are learning it now) are in 5th and 8th grades this fall.

 

[platzapS]

I have a four-year-old sister, and I like to teach her about the world. We're a Christian family, so I'm wondering if she'll find the difference between me teaching her evolution and what they'll teach her about Adam and Eve at the Christian school we go to.

 

[Beckijhn]

I'd say - stay away from evolution for the time being. It will only confuse her. It is a theory and a wrong one at that. She will eventually learn how to distinguish between the truth and what the world believes.

It is a good thing to know the other side of things (you can't argue what you don't know) but at the age of 4, 7, 10 or even older in some cases, this may not be the best thing to start teaching.

You can teach her a lot about the world as God intended it now, though. Look up Creation Science on the net, you'll be surprised at all the info available out there!

Also - before you start teaching something that may be controversial, you should ask your folks if it is okay with them!

 

[lucypevensie]

At the Christian school my kids go to the do teach ABOUT the theory of evolution to the older grades. Young grades are taught about God creating the earth. They are only taught ABOUT it in order to have a basic understanding of how the world thinks. It is not taught as absolute truth.

I agree with that approach.

 

[Papist]

I find this depressing. My heart sinks and my head goes uh-oh ...

Evolution is nothing more than a model of how the world came to be as it is, in a scientific sense. It's a flawed model in some ways, but, like any scientific model, it is not supposed to be taken as 'the truth.' Scientists do not 'believe in creation' in the sense of religious belief. By teaching that 'evolution is wrong' you are teaching your kids a false understanding of what science is.

The Creation story is a poem telling us that God created us in His image. Evolution theory is a model of how that happened. Genesis is not a science text book, neither is evolution theory a religious belief.

This debate should be laid to rest. In the Catholic Church, it has, with the Pope affirming that the Creation story is poetical.

 

[Papist]

You can teach her a lot about the world as God intended it now, though. Look up Creation Science on the net, you'll be surprised at all the info available out there!

Creation science is bad science. Creationist belief is bad theology and, moreover, an abuse of the Bible.

I would not dream of teaching my children that the Creation stories are literal. I will teach them that they tell us that God created the universe and us in His image but that the writers at the time had a limited understanding of science. I will also teach them that evolution is a theory, and that all scientific theories are flawed and subject to alteration, as new data comes in. Evolution theory fits the data to some extent, but like all theories, some data don't quite fit. That is all you can say.

No scientist worth their salt is absolutist about their theories.

 

[Papist]

I have a four-year-old sister, and I like to teach her about the world. We're a Christian family, so I'm wondering if she'll find the difference between me teaching her evolution and what they'll teach her about Adam and Eve at the Christian school we go to.

You have a duty to explain your understanding of science. By teaching a literal Adam and Eve, as though it is the truth, they are not providing you with a good education. By all means, they can teach that 'some people believe Adam and Eve were literal, real people' but that is different!

 

[Beckijhn]

The Bible is God breathed and is fact. If you don't believe that and you want to fall back on the theories of evolution that is totally your choice. The thing is this world could never have been created in a uniformitarian manner (evolution). Looking at the last 10 yrs or 100 years you would have to know that Catastrophism is the way this earth was formed (Mt St Helens, The Grand Canyon, etc etc).

Creation and Catastrophism go hand in hand. I don't follow any person (pope or otherwise) if it is contradictory to the Bible. Personally it takes WAY more faith to disbelieve God's word, than to believe it.

The Bible passes all the tests for historical accuracy (starting at the world wide flood). Look at the facts.

God's word is true and tells you everything you need to know. Studying the world, creation, and the history of the earth is easily understood when you truly believe in God and His Word.

I'd check out Apologia for Science that presents both sides. (textbooks) And I'd also check out Streams of Civilization if you want to know the history of man (from the migration for Ham Shem and Japheths family/clans, to present).

I don't know how anyone can partially believe in God. You either take him all or not at all. He won't fit in anyone's box. He IS. He is the great I AM, He doesn't need anyones permission or belief to be who he is - not even the popes.

 

[Papist]

The Bible is God breathed and is fact. If you don't believe that and you want to fall back on the theories of evolution that is totally your choice. The thing is this world could never have been created in a uniformitarian manner (evolution). Looking at the last 10 yrs or 100 years you would have to know that Catastrophism is the way this earth was formed (Mt St Helens, The Grand Canyon, etc etc).

Creation and Catastrophism go hand in hand. I don't follow any person (pope or otherwise) if it is contradictory to the Bible. Personally it takes WAY more faith to disbelieve God's word, than to believe it.

The Bible passes all the tests for historical accuracy (starting at the world wide flood). Look at the facts.

God's word is true and tells you everything you need to know. Studying the world, creation, and the history of the earth is easily understood when you truly believe in God and His Word.

I'd check out Apologia for Science that presents both sides. (textbooks) And I'd also check out Streams of Civilization if you want to know the history of man (from the migration for Ham Shem and Japheths family/clans, to present).

I don't know how anyone can partially believe in God. You either take him all or not at all. He won't fit in anyone's box. He IS. He is the great I AM, He doesn't need anyones permission or belief to be who he is - not even the popes.

This is not the place for arguing about whether or not Genesis is literal fact. This is about education. By ignoring the theory of evolution, you would be denying your children a fundamental aspect of their scientific education.

There are serious flaws in the theory of evolution and I do not believe that the theory fully explains (nor does it claim to) why we what we are, persons made in the image of God yet fallen. I believe in a divinely guided process of evolution rather than the random process of the main scientific theory. To me, evolution leaves to many 'human' questions unanswered. However, you cannot deny the scientific data that led to the theory, which suggests to be that the Genesis account is not literal.

I think there is truth in both accounts. The Genesis story tells us that God created all that is, and the evolutionary data give us an understanding of the process of creation. That is what the pope is saying.

It is simply not right to teach children to accept only the Creationist view.

 

[IslandBreeze]

God said it, and it was. In seven literal days (there was day, and then there was night). I wouldn't even consider teaching my children evolution. And I hope to be able to send them to Christian schools where they won't be confused by scientific bunk.

And BTW Papist, not everybody is Catholic. The Pope's opinions mean very little to me. God's Word means everything. He is above any man and any man's opinions.

 

[Beckijhn]

I'm sorry Papist, but this IS about education and therefore IS the place to argue evolution vs creation and part of that is whether or not Genesis is literal fact.

I do teach my kids the theory of evolution - as I stated, because they need to know the facts and the flaws to argue the point.

I have studied it and I can deny the 'scientific' data that led to the theory of evolution. It was outrageous bunk then and still is. Like - Duh! What were they thinking???

There is only one truth, it is God's truth.

 

[ZaraDurden]

Refusing to teach your child about evolution makes no sense to me...

I see no reason to not present both sides to your child. If creation is a fact like most christians say it is, then it should be obvious to your child that it is fact.

Why would you hide evolution from them? Are you afraid that your child might believe it is true? If you do fear this, then you must have some doubts about the fact of creation yourself. You can only be worried that your child might recognize some of the validity of evolution.

As you often see on this website, it has been creationists putting out false information to support creation more than scientists putting out false information to support evolution. Science can only be improved by finding itself to be wrong and making mistakes, while on the other hand creationists have everything to lose. I am not saying scientists have never lied, because i know they have, I am only saying a creationist is often forced to decieve themselves and others because they have no other choice when they find any evidence contrary to the Bible.

To those who said they would not teach their child evolution, i would really like to know your reasoning behind it. Thank you.

 

[platzapS]

I do teach my kids the theory of evolution - as I stated, because they need to know the facts and the flaws to argue the point.

How do you explain the theory of evolution to your children, and what do you consider age-appropriate explanations? You'd have to give different answers to different ages, right?

 

[Papist]

How do you explain the theory of evolution to your children, and what do you consider age-appropriate explanations? You'd have to give different answers to different ages, right?

Thanks for making me think about this.

Yes, it would have to be age-appropriate. My daughter is 4, and at that age, we are encouraging her to have a love of God's creation as it is now. We spend time walking in the woods, walking along beaches etc. The things of the natural world are so much more beautiful and meaningful than horrible plastic toys that cost so much and are basically made of oil that should be left in the ground where it has lain for millions of years.

She likes playing with toy dinosaurs -- we just tell her that they lived a long time before there were people.

It is sufficient at her age for her just to know that God created the world and all the people in it, and because God made the world, and all the people, we are to care for everyone and care for the natural world.

I think we will play it by ear as she grows up. I don't think you can prescribe age-related programmes for this.

If she has an interest in science, we will encourage that, but also teach her that science must be used to improve people's lives. When she is old enough (beyond 12, I would see), I will be able to explain the scientific method to her, and teach her that no scientific model of the world will be absolutely true. Science does not claim absolute truth.

 

[Papist]

Refusing to teach your child about evolution makes no sense to me...

I see no reason to not present both sides to your child. If creation is a fact like most christians say it is, then it should be obvious to your child that it is fact.

Why would you hide evolution from them? Are you afraid that your child might believe it is true? If you do fear this, then you must have some doubts about the fact of creation yourself. You can only be worried that your child might recognize some of the validity of evolution.

As you often see on this website, it has been creationists putting out false information to support creation more than scientists putting out false information to support evolution. Science can only be improved by finding itself to be wrong and making mistakes, while on the other hand creationists have everything to lose. I am not saying scientists have never lied, because i know they have, I am only saying a creationist is often forced to decieve themselves and others because they have no other choice when they find any evidence contrary to the Bible.

To those who said they would not teach their child evolution, i would really like to know your reasoning behind it. Thank you.

That is very well put. As Christians, we should not just switch our brains off and ignore anything outside the Bible. The Bible is not the straightforward book that many believe it to be. You simply cannot take what it says at face value, with no understanding of the culture of the writers. The writers did not have scientific knowledge. This topic brings up the question of how you believe the Bible was inspired, and Biblical literalists and fundamentalists have got that wrong. The Bible was not dictated by God like a CEO to his secretary.

 

[Papist]

God said it, and it was. In seven literal days (there was day, and then there was night). I wouldn't even consider teaching my children evolution. And I hope to be able to send them to Christian schools where they won't be confused by scientific bunk.

And BTW Papist, not everybody is Catholic. The Pope's opinions mean very little to me. God's Word means everything. He is above any man and any man's opinions.

Why are you so negative about everything outside the Bible, and your narrow interpretation at that? It seems like the only thing you approve of outside the Bible is the Republican Party and American superiority over everyone else.

How can you ignore the Pope just like that? He happens to be the leader of the largest Christian church on the planet. But no, the rantings of GW Bush feature more highly to you.

The Pope has authority from Christ to teach. Does the Republican Party have that? GWB? CNN? You?

 

[IslandBreeze]

Every Christian has the authority from Christ to teach. He commanded it in the Great Commission (book of Matthew). I am NOT negative of everything outside of the Bible, but I try to let God's word be my guide over any opinions or ideals that any person on earth may have.

I am not Catholic, and do not follow Catholic beliefs, therefore the Pope and his opinions are no different to me than John Doe in the street.

 

[Papist]

but I try to let God's word be my guide over any opinions or ideals that any person on earth may have.

I am not Catholic, and do not follow Catholic beliefs, therefore the Pope and his opinions are no different to me than John Doe in the street.

I'm glad you try to let God's word be your guide. So do we all, if we are Christians. The problem is that God's word has to be discerned. The Bible is not a clear-cut set of teachings, in the way the Buddhist scriptures are, for example. Yes, there are clear-cut bits: the 10 commandments is one example; Christ's invitation (never forced, remember) to repent of our sins and turn to Him as the way to the loving Father is another example. Beyond that, much is open to interpretation. When you go beyond the essential gospel of Christ, and the 10 commandments, you are in grey areas and there are many questions that different interpreters answer differently.

Beyond those essentials, which all churches agree on (it is a nasty and pernicious myth that the Catholic church is a religion of works), we have a need for Spirit-guided interpretation. Over 1500 years, this interpretation was done within the Catholic church, with important checks and balances to make sure that what was taught was consistent with what came before. Then came the Reformation, and different men started teaching different things. Yes, the Catholic Church as an institution was corrupt and needed reform, but it did not need theological reform, and it was the utmost arrogance for the reformers to start changing doctrine. All church institutions need reform as all fall into the temptations of spiritual power.

Look at these forums. When a Biblical topic is discussed, it's "I believe it means ..." and "I disagree, I think it means ..." It is clear that it is NOT clear!

People disagree over infant baptism, the meaning of Revelation, all sorts of things. This is because the Bible can be darned hard to understand, beyond its core message of salvation in Christ. It requires hard, prayerful, scholarly work to understand, within a tradition of consistent interpretation. The Catholic Church offers that.

Jesus promised us the Holy Spirit, which would lead us into all truth. He promised us a Church, built upon the Rock that was Peter. Peter passed on this authority to his successors, right down to John Paul II.