Why are public schools terrified of examining evolution & creation?

Although science is thought of as being objective, in reality it’s intimately involved with ones worldview Photo: Anti-evolution/ AP

CALIFORNIA,  November 18, 2013 – If evolution is true, there’s a simple way for public schools to destroy any student’s belief in creation. Simply test each theory objectively in science classes using the scientific method. Instead, irrational lawsuits, court orders and fears of anything hinting of Christianity have become the weapons of choice to prevent use of objective science.

So, what are public schools really afraid of?

Could it be that testing competing theories of origins may give a morally superior worldview credibility? Let’s face it; there are only two basic theories explaining where everything came from: evolution and special creation. And each of these options involves some degree of faith, with implications much broader than just the science tests involved.

Believers in evolution see all life originating by natural processes from non-living matter. This “goo to you” progression requires billions of years, no divine intervention, and sees natural selection (survival of the fittest), mutation, or some yet undiscovered process as responsible for all observed life.

Creationists believe God purposely and uniquely created the entire universe; all matter, energy and fully functioning living species in six days (Genesis 1:1-2:25) out of nothingness (Hebrews 11:3) thousands of years ago.

Since evolution requires incredibly long periods of time, and God’s original creative act is finished, neither theory can be verified experimentally. It’s also futile to try and reconcile both. Evolution advocates a creation without any need for a Creator, and Christian evolutionists ignore the entire redemptive activity of God by trying to fit billions of years of life and death into the Genesis creation account.

Although both theories are comprehensive in scope, incompatible with each other, and have real world implications it’s ironic that scientific inquiry in schools is legally restricted to evolution. Not only is this a perfect example of “self-fulfilled prophesy”, it’s doubly ironic since the Bible encourages critical observation of the created order (1 Kings 4:29-34; Proverbs 25:1; Ecclesiastes 7:27) and the Creator of that order (1 Corinthians 14:33).

So why do government schools have such an irrational fear of objective scientific comparison?

Could it be that the worldview implied by mindless evolution is so radical compared to a worldview implied by a Creator?

With evolution, life has no real meaning unless someone arbitrarily thinks so. There’s no ultimate purpose; no moral right or wrong; and no reason to think racism, sexism, abortion or even genocide is anything more than survival of the fittest. If a Creator God doesn’t exist, we’re accountable to no one, and any manner of moral deviancy or government atrocity is no more than a choice.

However, if special creation is true we’re invested with the very image of God (Genesis 1:27) and accountable for the gift of our lives (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14). We’re also imbued with a conscience (Romans 2:14-15), an innate understanding of the existence of God and a sense of his divine nature (Psalm 19:1; 53:1; Romans 1:20).

To dismiss creation as just religion and treat evolution as proven science has nothing to do with objective, scientific facts. Each theory should stand or fall based on available, tested evidence.

That being said, is evolution demonstrably true as many believe? Consider the following:

The second law of thermodynamics (entropy) says the universe is running down and becoming less ordered. But evolution demands this universal law be violated and immensely complex organisms be brought into existence through simple random processes. With creation, the initial complexity of the universe and its subsequent decay are consistent with today’s realities (Genesis 1:31-2:2; Romans 8:20-21).

Every known organism is clearly designed in marvelously intricate and self-contained ways. There are no partial, non-functional parts waiting to evolve (or mutate) into something useful. In fact, even the “simple cell” is vastly more complex and perfect in design than anything mankind has been able to create. Does evolution or creation better account for this incredible sophistication?

What about the lack of unambiguous transitional life forms in the fossil record? Anyone can take different fossilized species and arrange them to mimic evolutionary progression. But in reality, this type of evidence is either exceptionally rare or non-existent. In fact, the discredited evolution of Eohippus to the modern horse shows how desperate “objective” science can be.

But there’s an even more basic problem with evolution: answering why all life must die.

If unthinking, purposeless evolution could bring inanimate matter to life, why couldn’t it keep life from dying?

Even well meaning Christians trying to reconcile evolution with Genesis face the same question. If death existed for billions of years then the curse of death for sin (Genesis 2:15-17; 3:14-19) makes no sense and the need for a Redeemer from that curse is just a delusion (1 Corinthians 15:1-58).

Ultimately, the evolutionary belief system envisions mankind continuing to progress until he obtains some form of god nature. Interestingly, that was the very lie that Adam and Eve were deceived by in the Garden of Eden that resulted in their spiritual and physical death (Genesis 3:1-5).

Clearly, for both theories the interpretation of available evidence will be subject to conjecture and new discoveries. However, enshrining evolution as the only alternative for objective scientific consideration reflects a worldview that’s hostile towards anything that may imply the existence of the supernatural.

Which worldview will prevail is the real battle, not just which theory of origins best fits the facts.

One explains why death exists and gives hope; while the other tries to explain life and offers no hope.

Follow Frank on Twitter @FrankKacer or #BiblicalPolitics



This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Biblical Politics
blog comments powered by Disqus
Frank Kacer

Frank Kacer has been writing and lecturing on the applications of a Biblical worldview to the contemporary issues of the day since the mid 1990s. Besides his regular Biblical Politics column with the Washington Times Communities, Frank has authored over 100 op-ed columns for Good News Etc. and the popular Christian Examiner. Frank can be reached at frankkacer@hotmail.com


Contact Frank Kacer


Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus