Dr. David
Menton holds a PhD in biology from Brown University and served as an
award-winning professor at Washington University School of Medicine in St.
Louis for 34 years. He retired as an Associate Professor Emeritus and now
serves with Answers in Genesis as a
speaker, writer, and researcher.
"Some
piously record `In the beginning God,' but I say in the beginning
hydrogen." This pompous claim of crass materialism challenging the
creative work of God by astronomer Harlow Shapley reflects the quandary
students face today in our public and private schools. Many students, for
example, have been required to watch and discuss the 13-part television series
"Cosmos" featuring one of Shapley's best known students, Carl Sagan. In
the first sentence of his book Cosmos (which is meant to supplement the television
series), Sagan confidently declared in capital letters that "THE COSMOS IS
ALL THAT IS OR EVER WAS OR EVER WILL BE." Sagan assures us that "we
humans are the products of a long series of biological accidents" and
concludes that all of our human traits - loves and hates, passions and despairs,
tenderness and aggression are simply the result of "minor accidents in our
immensely long evolutionary history." Sagan believes that "men may
not be the dreams of the gods, but rather that the gods are the dreams of
men." In an interview published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Oct. 6,
1980), Sagan was asked to comment on his view of the future of man. Sagan
replied, "I feel in order to survive we someday must be able to give up
our allegiance to our nation, our religion, our race and economic group and
think of ourselves more as just a temporary form of life . . ."
We hear much about that great
"wall of separation" that the framers of our Constitution were supposed
to have erected to protect us from state-mandated religion. But are we to also
be protected from state-mandated instruction in evolutionary beliefs and
speculations that threaten to undermine the religious beliefs of many of our
students? Evolution is a jealous god that neither seeks nor welcomes divine
intervention. Julian Huxley, one of evolution's most vocal champions, declared
that "the whole of reality is evolution-a single process of self-transformation."
In this view there can be nothing above or outside of evolution, and thus the
origin of religion itself is merely a minor blip in the recent evolutionary history
of the universe. Even so, evolutionists often argue that there is nothing
incompatible between religion and evolution as long as each confines itself to
its own legitimate domain. But what limits can be set for a natural process
that claims to be nothing less than the whole of reality?
Science, or more accurately
"scientism," has not hesitated to wade into the domain of religion. In
1981, theologians and scientists met at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
under the auspices of the World Council of Churches to discuss the topic
"Science, Faith and the Future." The general premise of the
conference was that modern science requires us to develop an entirely new
religion for the future. One theologian proposed evolutionary theory as
"an especially rich source" for this new religion. Another proposed
"ecotheology" as an approach to religion that "starts with the
premise that the universe is god." Not to be outdone by theologians, a
scientist claimed to have localized the exact part of the brain responsible for
what "traditional religion calls the intuitive perception of God." Religious
experience, he claimed, is "a product of the parietal-occipital region on
the nondominant side of the brain." [Long, 1981 #246] Who knows - by now
he may even have found a cure!
Although many popular spokesmen for
evolutionism are self-proclaimed atheists or agnostics, this certainly does not
mean that all those who accept evolution in principle are atheists or
agnostics. Indeed, many leaders, teachers and clergy in most major Christian
and Jewish denominations have tried to make their peace with Darwin. These
theologians generally argue that the Bible tells us who created, while science
(that is evolution) tells us how He "created." This perhaps explains
why a large gathering of Catholic educators meeting in St. Louis a few years
ago invited Carl Sagan to be their keynote speaker!
Darwin himself received his formal
education in theology, not science. His atheist father sent him to divinity
school at Cambridge University after he dropped out of medical school. In his
autobiography, Darwin claimed to have once believed in God and "every word
of the Bible" but confessed that his growing evolutionary views gradually
led him to unbelief. In the end he considered the Old Testament to be a
"manifestly false history of the world" and said that he "could
hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true." [Darwin,
1896 #242] Sadly, the widespread rumors of his deathbed repudiation of
evolutionism and return to Christianity are unfounded.
Today we encounter evolutionary
indoctrination wherever we turn. It may be incorporated into almost any subject
at any grade level in our schools, but it is especially prevalent in classes
dealing with social studies, history and science. Outside the classroom,
evolution is heavily promoted in our newspapers, popular magazines, television,
radio, movies, national parks, museums, science centers, zoos and even on the
backs of breakfast cereal boxes. Despite all this exposure, most Americans are
still not convinced that evolution can explain the marvelous complexity we see
all around us in nature.
A recent Gallop poll revealed that
47% of Americans believe "God created man pretty much in his present form
at one time within the last 10,000 years." Only 9% believed that "man
has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life" by
a purely materialistic process. Most of the remaining respondents believed in
some form of divinely-guided evolution. Still, the media would have us believe
that those who reject evolution in favor of special creation comprise only a
tiny minority, even among the religious - a small band of ignorant
fundamentalists who are "poorly educated and easily led."
We will critically examine the
scientific evidence both for and against evolution. Is the evidence for evolution
so overwhelming that teachers may be justified in running rough-shod over the
most cherished religious beliefs of many students and their parents? On the other
hand, is there scientific evidence in support of special creation? Finally, can
Bible-believing Christians safely make their peace with Darwin? We will attempt
to answer these and many other questions on the relationship of science and
Scripture. I think you are in for some real surprises.