Teaching Children Evolution

[Beckijhn]

I think the reason I hold off on teaching the kids evolution (at it's detailed level) is that they need not be innundated with what is not true or what is false. It is the same reason that I do not teach my kids about homosexuality at a young age. Yes it's out there, yes some people think it's right/personal choice, but I believe it's wrong. When they are able to understand what it is, I introduce the topic and discuss it in a way they can handle it.

My kids have been hearing about evolution from day one. My son loves the "Land Before Time" series of movies and it started right there. So I started there too! I explained the truth on his level and explained that some people don't believe in God and want to make everyone think their way and discredit Christian beliefs. Etc etc.

As to the Catholic church, I don't have a problem with it. It is not my denomination and I don't agree with a lot the pope says, but if you do - more power to you. I base everything on the Word and what God reveals to me (as we all should through reading and prayer).

I think what it comes down to is do you believe in Jesus and what he did for you on the cross. Have you accepted Him as He presents Himself to you - the only link to God (not through any priest or bishop or pastor, just Jesus)

That was a bit OT, but it has to do with whether or not you follow the Pope.

I have no doubt that Creation will stand on it's own - with or without me!

 

[IslandBreeze]

My kids have been hearing about evolution from day one. My son loves the "Land Before Time" series of movies and it started right there. So I started there too! I explained the truth on his level and explained that some people don't believe in God and want to make everyone think their way and discredit Christian beliefs. Etc etc.

Good point! I didn't think about movies and having to explain things! I definitely want my kids to enjoy Jurassic Park. I can't shelter them from things like that! And what a great tool to use to teach the value of Creationism that much more. Thanks for opening my eyes on that point!

As to the Catholic church, I don't have a problem with it. It is not my denomination and I don't agree with a lot the pope says, but if you do - more power to you. I base everything on the Word and what God reveals to me (as we all should through reading and prayer).

Exactly. I agree wholeheartedly.

I have no doubt that Creation will stand on it's own - with or without me!

Amen.

 

[platzapS]

I think that when she's ready, I'll probably tell her that some people think this way (explaining Creationism) and some think this...(evolution). I'll state my personal opinion, and then answer any questions she might have.

 

[ZaraDurden]

"I think the reason I hold off on teaching the kids evolution (at it's detailed level) is that they need not be innundated with what is not true or what is false. "

I am not sure if i am understanding your correctly, but are you assuming that the theory of evolution is false? Evolution, except at the macro level, is widely accepted to be true, and it actually has been witnessed in action at the micro level (within species).

Why would you teach kids the theory of evolution but then tell them it is false, when in actuality it has not yet been disproven. If you are confident of the falsehood of evolution, do you not think your kids would be able to recognize that by themselves?

I feel like those who said they refuse to teach their children evolution, or those that teach them that it is false, are ducking my question. Is there any reason you would not present them with the evidence for evolution equally as the evidence for creationism and let them decide for themselves other than that you fear they might see some validity in the theory of evolution? If you have this fear, then you must yourself have some doubts about the absolute true of creationism.

Any honest response to this question would be much appreciated. Thank you.

 

[Beckijhn]

I believe that is what I said I did.

I do believe it's false because I've studied it and there's no way it can be true - but that aside, I specifically chose Science and History curriculum to show both sides. Both subjects are thourough and HONEST about both sides and allow the student to make their own choice.

As to how and when I explain things it's like saying your kitty is with Jesus instead of Your kitty was in the combine when Joe started it and he didn't know, so the kitty was mutilated, but that's okay he's with Jesus. I mean we have to decide what is appropriate at what level.

That's as honest as I can get for the moment - gotta head out. I'll be back later.

 

[ZaraDurden]

Just because you have studied it and felt it is false, that does not make it so.

There are many people out there with much more knowledge on the subject of evolution than you or I who feel that it is undenyably true.

Again, the theory of evolution has not been falsified, and it is only the evolution of one species to another that is still really in question. I would say the main reason macroeveloutionary theory is still not accepted is the majority religion in America, particularly American government, is christianity. The other strike against it is that it takes so long to occur it has not yet been measured. Even citing this, it remains the best explination of live on this planet as it exists today.

You are not giving your kids the chance to realize truth. I am not claiming that I have the true or even that you are wrong. The surest way to corrupt a youth is to tell him that his views are better than another's. Let them decide for themselves.

 

[Papist]

Just because you have studied it and felt it is false, that does not make it so.

There are many people out there with much more knowledge on the subject of evolution than you or I who feel that it is undenyably true.

Again, the theory of evolution has not been falsified, and it is only the evolution of one species to another that is still really in question. I would say the main reason macroeveloutionary theory is still not accepted is the majority religion in America, particularly American government, is christianity. The other strike against it is that it takes so long to occur it has not yet been measured. Even citing this, it remains the best explination of live on this planet as it exists today.

You are not giving your kids the chance to realize truth. I am not claiming that I have the true or even that you are wrong. The surest way to corrupt a youth is to tell him that his views are better than another's. Let them decide for themselves.

OK, I'm treading a tricky middle path here. Yes, evolution is a good theory to fit the data ... but on the other hand, it cannot, being a scientific theory, give us any moral guidance as to how to treat God's creation. An evolutionist may be correct in a scientific sense, and then feel justified in all sorts of abuses of his fellow human beings and of nature.

However, if we read the Creation story and take its meaning to heart, we will know that human beings are made (however they came to be made) in the image of God, are given life by God, but fall short of God. The evolution theory can only provide scientific answers to scientific questions, whereas the Creation story gives us major clues about our relationship with God.

Evolution theory is good science but it does not provide us with an understanding of where we stand with God. The Creation story is not science, but does provide that understanding.

In other words, it should not be Creationism versus Evolutionism; but "What does the Creation story teach us?"

 

[Papist]

To move on from my last post. If you hold to Darwin's theory as an absolute, you can come to the view that we are just animals, driven by our genetic and biological urges, and that morality can be thrown out. A thorough-going evolutionist would be able to justify abortion, "eu"thanasia, "eu"genics etc. (I put the eu in quotes because it means 'good' whereas these things are anything but good.)

We need the Creation story but we mustn't fall into the trap of thinking it is a scientific theory.

 

[Papist]

Furthermore, by claiming that Christians must reject the evolutionary theory in favour of Creationism, we put an unnecessary stumbling block in the way of scientists who may otherwise come to know Christ.

 

[Papist]

I think that when she's ready, I'll probably tell her that some people think this way (explaining Creationism) and some think this...(evolution). I'll state my personal opinion, and then answer any questions she might have.

The theory of evolution is answering a different question than the Creation story:

Creation -- why are we here? What is our relationship to each other and to God?

Evolution -- how, physically, did we get to be the way we are? How do we explain these fossils?

From this point of view, evolution and creation are not incompatible. The Creation story has more bearing on my life because it speaks of my relationship to God and his creation. Evolutionary theory has little bearing on my life -- it's just an interesting factoid that is stored up somewhere in my brain.

 

[Beckijhn]

hmmm - you are in the middle Papist. That is a tricky place to be. I personally don't think that God needs any help.

Zara - It is false - if evolution were true on the time frame given by evolutionist's there would have been 60 or so evolutionary changes in the MY lifetime. (I mean come on how many changes DOES it take to get from monkey to man? Not to mention pond scum to monkey...)

I've read a lot about it, talked with some of the brightest scientific minds that have studied it, and still don't see anything other than disproving God as a drive for promoting evolution. It's totally rediculous.

Neadrethal Man, had a normal sized brain and evidence suggest that he raised flowers, made tools, painted pictures, and practiced religion - they believe his stooped posture is from arthritis and a lack of vt D

Cro magnon Man - Scientists believe that he looks much the same as modern man and no longer think he's a missing link.

Java Man - designed from two teeth discovered by Dr Dubois in old river gravels in SE Asia. He found a skull cap and thigh bone at a Different location a YEAR later. They finally decided that the teeth were from an Orangutan and the skull cap from a gibbon. The thigh bone from modern man.

Peking Man - teeth and skull fragments discovered near Peking - limited access to them to a select group of scientists (surprise) the bones disappeared during WWII while being shipped. Some who did examine them believe they are from animals.

Piltdown man - (near Piltdown England) - created quite a stir and 40 years later it was found that they were chemically treated to make them look old, and the different parts came from different animals. This is the one called the Piltdown Hoax where they have discovered that the jawbone is from a modern ape and the skull cap from a man. Story goes that one scientist played a trick on another by treating and filing the bones to look like the real thing.

Anyway - that's about all the time I have to write for now - have to go play Nintendo with my boy.

Oh yea, the moth thing Darwin thought was proof of evolutionary and survival of the fittest... I cant' remember the exact details but it was like a late season I believe and one type of moth was picked off by birds a lot easier since they no longer had Camoflauge. That explains the flux in numbers - not evolution.

This happened in AK a few years back with the bunnies. We had a late spring and the bunnies turned brown before they should have. Good year for rabbit hunting!

Just an added note.

 

[Papist]

hmmm - you are in the middle Papist. That is a tricky place to be. I personally don't think that God needs any help.

I'm more on the creationist side than the evolution side, Becki. I admit that there are too many holes and flaws in evolutionary theory for it to hang together, in my view. An eye-opening moment for me was on a trip to New Zealand. We visited a cave with thousands of glow-worms on the ceiling. They glow to catch prey: insects wander into the cave and look up. They think they see the night sky and fly upwards, only to get themselves caught up on a sticky strand hanging down from a glow-worm. The glow-worm then pulls in the strand and digests the insect. I found myself thinking, "How on earth did that evolve?!"

I believe that God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them.

Having said that, I don't believe in a literal six day (six times 24 hours) creation either. The universe is way too old -- astronomy gives us an idea of its age, and it is way beyond what Creation Scientists claim.

I think young children are best taught the Creation story as it allows us to guide them with knowledge about God, themselves, others, and nature. The theory of evolution is for later -- teenage years, perhaps, as they explore scientific ideas more deeply.

 

[Beckijhn]

I love astronomy, but haven't studied it in regards to the age of the universe. We have books and graphs of the stars and their placement and all that, and some great night vision binocs!!!

My youth pastor once explained that on the day that God hung the sun, moon and stars, he hung them as they are. We already had light and it was separated from dark, so when the heavenly objects were put in place it was in process. Kind of like the first chicken made without benefit of the egg.

Anyway - I agree - theories that would confuse morality should be introduced when kids are more mature and ready to analyze.

 

[Knight]

There are many theories on the astronomical proof of an old universe. One of the most popular is that God created the universe in a mature state. Much like he created Adam in a mature state rather than an infant.

I once read a very well thought out article on a theory relating to time dilation as it applied to the point of creation. Thus explaining how light from distant stars could reach the Earth in a literal 6 day creation. I can see if I can find the article if anybody is interested.

 

[Beckijhn]

I'd be interested! Thanks!!!

 

[Knight]

Here you go:

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c005.html

 

[platzapS]

The theory of evolution is answering a different question than the Creation story:

Creation -- why are we here? What is our relationship to each other and to God?

Evolution -- how, physically, did we get to be the way we are? How do we explain these fossils?

From this point of view, evolution and creation are not incompatible. The Creation story has more bearing on my life because it speaks of my relationship to God and his creation. Evolutionary theory has little bearing on my life -- it's just an interesting factoid that is stored up somewhere in my brain.

Excellent idea, Papist. That greatly helps me.

 

[ZaraDurden]

"However, if we read the Creation story and take its meaning to heart, we will know that human beings are made (however they came to be made) in the image of God, are given life by God, but fall short of God. The evolution theory can only provide scientific answers to scientific questions, whereas the Creation story gives us major clues about our relationship with God."

Papist: I thought this quote, along with that entire post, was beautiful. I think that the Bible as a spiritual guide is a great book... as a history book it is more than questionable... i agree with you whole heartedly that evolution should not dictate anything about god, and that the meaning of the story of creationism is more important than the facts. It is the people who have a reverse arguement than you that i argue with.

"...you can come to the view that we are just animals, driven by our genetic and biological urges, and that morality can be thrown out."

I'm going to have to do ahead and disagree with you on the final part of this one. I believe that evolution is fact, and i feel that we are not really better than animals, but i do not think that morality can be thrown out. I dont buy into the bible as law because it was written so long ago and it was biased on the feelings of the times it was written... the world is so much different, and we need to reevaluate all values! But we cannot live without some kind of values, because to survive we need society, and to have an operational society we need values.

Beckijhn:
Neadrethal Man, Cro magnon Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Piltdown man... If only evolution were completely and totally based on these 5, you would have it cast out of books all over the world!!! But, the theory of evolution is based on a hecht of a lot more than that. I dont want to get into a debate about its validity, because that has been done in other forums. If experts alllllll over the world cannot disprove it, how can you think that you can in so few worlds? Give you kids a shot to check the validity of it for themselves!

You also have mentioned a moth- the peppered moth i believe- and this example actually is scientific proof of the theory of evolution on a micro scale (within species).

The (true) story goes like this. In a forest, (in England i believe) there lived a soceity of white peppered moths. A factory was next to that forest, polluting it terribly (what a shame), making the trees that the peppered moths inhabited black. The now black tress the white peppered moths inhabitied made it tremendously easy for birds and other preditors to see them and they were getting eaten up left and right. One way or another, whether it was through an existing gene or a mutation, some of the moths of this society were born black instead of white. These black moths, which blended in with the trees, survived much, much better than those white ones. Since they survived better, they were able to reproduce more, and pass on this black gene. And in a little over a decade, through many generations of moths, the moth population which had once been white was now entirely black. Keep in mind that no moths actually changed color, but it was an entirely new crop of moths. This is not fiction, this was a witnessed and measured account. The moths adapted to suit their environent... survival of the fittest in action!

Finally, once again i call for anyone who says they will exclude evolution from their children's education, and i call for their reasons.

Great posts Papist!

 

[straightforward]

"However, if we read the Creation story and take its meaning to heart, we will know that human beings are made (however they came to be made) in the image of God, are given life by God, but fall short of God. The evolution theory can only provide scientific answers to scientific questions, whereas the Creation story gives us major clues about our relationship with God."

Papist: I thought this quote, along with that entire post, was beautiful. I think that the Bible as a spiritual guide is a great book... as a history book it is more than questionable... i agree with you whole heartedly that evolution should not dictate anything about god, and that the meaning of the story of creationism is more important than the facts. It is the people who have a reverse arguement than you that i argue with.

"...you can come to the view that we are just animals, driven by our genetic and biological urges, and that morality can be thrown out."

I'm going to have to do ahead and disagree with you on the final part of this one. I believe that evolution is fact, and i feel that we are not really better than animals, but i do not think that morality can be thrown out. I dont buy into the bible as law because it was written so long ago and it was biased on the feelings of the times it was written... the world is so much different, and we need to reevaluate all values! But we cannot live without some kind of values, because to survive we need society, and to have an operational society we need values.

Beckijhn:
Neadrethal Man, Cro magnon Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Piltdown man... If only evolution were completely and totally based on these 5, you would have it cast out of books all over the world!!! But, the theory of evolution is based on a hecht of a lot more than that. I dont want to get into a debate about its validity, because that has been done in other forums. If experts alllllll over the world cannot disprove it, how can you think that you can in so few worlds? Give you kids a shot to check the validity of it for themselves!

You also have mentioned a moth- the peppered moth i believe- and this example actually is scientific proof of the theory of evolution on a micro scale (within species).

The (true) story goes like this. In a forest, (in England i believe) there lived a soceity of white peppered moths. A factory was next to that forest, polluting it terribly (what a shame), making the trees that the peppered moths inhabited black. The now black tress the white peppered moths inhabitied made it tremendously easy for birds and other preditors to see them and they were getting eaten up left and right. One way or another, whether it was through an existing gene or a mutation, some of the moths of this society were born black instead of white. These black moths, which blended in with the trees, survived much, much better than those white ones. Since they survived better, they were able to reproduce more, and pass on this black gene. And in a little over a decade, through many generations of moths, the moth population which had once been white was now entirely black. Keep in mind that no moths actually changed color, but it was an entirely new crop of moths. This is not fiction, this was a witnessed and measured account. The moths adapted to suit their environent... survival of the fittest in action!

Finally, once again i call for anyone who says they will exclude evolution from their children's education, and i call for their reasons.

Great posts Papist!

You might want to check out a book called 'Icons of Evolution' by Jonathan Wells. It covers some of this and might be an eye opener for you. And I would suggest, if you are truly going to approach this as science, you read and weigh his information and references before jumping to a conclusion based on what other people say about this. It really is well written and worth the read if only for weighing what other scientists are starting to look at concerning evolution.

 

[ZaraDurden]

I am always open to the other side... I will do that, thanks.