Evolution vs Creation



The Great Debate: Should Creation Be Taught in School?
Evolution versus creation has been a debate lasting
decades upon decades in the United States and around the
world. The mock trial held during class, however, was not
to prove one view as right and the other wrong. Rather,
the focus of the trial, from the view of the prosecution,
was simply to prove that creation should not be taught as a
science in schools.
The prosecution and the defense were each allowed
four witnesses. A fifth grade science teacher, a preacher,
a world religions professor, and Dawkins were called to the
stand by the prosecution. My part in the trial was that of
the preacher. Our argument was simple; the preacher believed
creation to be true, of course, but did not see how creation
could be taught as a science. Instead, the view of creation
should be a part of a religion or philosophy class.
According to the scientific method, a true
scientific hypothesis or theory about anything must be able
to be proven false. "There is a very important
characteristic of a scientific theory or hypothesis, which
differentiates it from, for example, an act of faith: it
must be \'falsifiable\'. This means that there must be some
experiment or possible discovery that could prove the
theory untrue" (Wudka 2). If there is no way to disprove
something, it can not be classified as a science. In
addition, a true science must be reproducible. According to
Behe, origin of life scientists have created life using the
same conditions that would have existed on the early earth.
It is impossible, however, to duplicate creation.
In addition to the argument of testability, creation
should not be taught as a science because it goes against the
rulings of the federal government. In 1987, in a case known
as Edwards versus Aguillard, the U.S. Supreme Court held
unconstitutional Louisiana\'s \'Creationism Act.\' The Creationism
Act stated that evolution could only be taught when it was
accompanied by the teaching of creation. "The Court found
that, by advancing the religious belief that a supernatural
being created humankind, which is embraced by the term creation
science, the act impermissibly endorses religion" (Court
Decisions). As a result, the Court decided that a comprehensive
science education could not be received unless evolution, without
creation, existed in the class syllabus.
Long ago, the government decided that a separation of
church and state should exist. The prosecution reasoned that
since "everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities,
for there is no authority except that which God has established.
The authorities that exist have been established by God" (Romans 13:1).
As Christians, we should accept what the authorities tell us, since that
is what God commanded. Therefore, creation should not be taught as a
science in school.
Creation, however, should not be completely written
out of a child\'s education. "All Scripture is God-breathed
and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and
training in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16). A religion or
philosophy class should insert the teachings of creation
into their curriculum. If this method is adopted, then the
views of creation would not be forced upon students.
Forcing religion on people rarely benefits anyone. "For
the time will come when men will not put up with sound
doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will
gather around them a great number of teachers to say what
their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears
away from the truth and turn aside to myths" (2 Timothy
2:3-4).
According to the basic point of the scientific
method, creation is not a science because it can not be
proved false. Not only is creation not testable, but
according to the United States Supreme Court, creation
should be kept out of the science class. The Bible tells
us to obey figures of authority; therefore, the argument
seems null and void. Without question, creation\'s place is
in a religion or philosophy classroom.

Works Cited
"Background: Six Significant Court Decisions Regarding Evolution/Creation Issues." http://www.cs.colorado.edu/lindsay/creation/voices/legal/bkgrd.
htm
Behe, Michael J. Darwin\'s Black Box.
Romans 13:1. "Bible Gateway." http://bible.gospelcom.net/
2 Timothy 4:2-4. "Bible Gateway." http://bible.gospelcom.net/
Wudka, Jose. "What is the \'scientific method\'?" http://rom.pomona.edu/scien_method/node6.html#SECTION02121000000000000000




Bibliography: