Creation or Evolution taught in school?

I'm pretty sure you've heard of the debate in schools about teaching (bible-based) creationism versus (science based) evolutionism. Who is right, how can both be valid, etc. etc. The debate rages back and forth. I have read about the debate on both sides and I have been on both sides (science before I became a christian and creation after) Before I became a christian that was one of my peaves I would always snag people that would witness (tell the gospel of Jesus Christ)

"Well what does the bible say about dinosaurs and cavemen? Sure they existed, there are fossils, artifacts, etc., proving evolution and stuff? Whatcha gotta say now, huh, christian?" SO then when I dedicated my life to Christ (for reasons other than evolution, but that's another blog entry), well actually several months later, I stumbled upon this guy on a tv show talking about "Christian Science Evangelism" and he broke it all down in a way I had never heard before. I will preface with the fact that the bible says that God's word is ALWAYS backed up with principles in scripture, so anybody talking nonsense, or even good seeming sense means nothing if they can't relate it back to biblical scripture, and not some contorted semantic way either, plain english...the bible also says God does "simple things to confound the wise." -1 Corinthians 1:27. So if with my master's degree I can't even grasp your concept i'm more inclined to say you are teaching unsound doctrine and/or a false prophet. So, that being the criteria for a valid arguement, Ken Hovind, a retired high school science teacher explained the basics of creation science evangelism, which i didn't realize was different from "intelligent design" and "evolutionary spirituality."


He said that first of all....

1. "in the beginning" NOBODY was there that is here now, or that documented what happened...so whether you believe there was a God/intelligent design or a big bang, that denotes your faith to some degree because there is not any absolutely conclusive proof. You believe what you read in books and see on tv. Now whether your book is the bible or an encyclopedia and your tv show is somebody's ministry or national geographic...neither of them was there. So, since you don't cant KNOW the truth for yourself, your FAITH dictates which story you choose to believe.

2. Evolution and and the age of the earth - He discredits evolution (not absolutely ie within a species, but in the broad sense of man coming from fish in the sea, that came on land and walked, etc.) by the book of Genesis 1:20-23 saying God creating everything at once – in 6 days, not millions of years as believed by evolutionists and "gap" theorists (gap theorists believe God made the earth, but He did it billions of years ago, big difference.) So from that he proposed the earth was indeed not BILLIONS of years old, but only about 6,000-8,000 years old, and that can be traced from the time Christ lived (30 BC-33 AD) if you go through all that stuff in the old testament (Adam begat Cain and he lived for x years, etc.). So then further, he asks why then if there are so many fossils of dinosaurs and birds, and "cavemen" etc., why are there none from this period of transition from "walking fish?" One thing I found particularly interesting was that he referenced the chinese language. China being the oldest living civilization, their alphabet system is also very telling of creationist origin. For instance the symbol for "to talk" is a combination of the symbols for "dust", "breath" and "alive" as in the book of Genesis 2:7. There are several other examples of this, the easiest explanation i saw online was here. It breaks down many of the similarities and the historical context. Interesting relation to the tower of babel and the migration of the original people (the bible says there were one people that spoke the same tongue before the building of the tower) east to "china" over the course of some 500 years. A fact that makes the chinese language seemingly intact from that migration to today, which would make it another direct link to the God of the old testament and creationism.

3. Carbon dating - I was really surprised by his point that carbon dating is scientifically invalid when used for things like fossils because, THERE IS NO CONTROL TO COMPARE A NEW SPECIMEN TO. You remember in science class you had the hypothesis, and then when you do the experiment you have a "control" of which you know the status of, and then your experiment, which you compare it to. Well, in "evolutionist theory" there is nothing that scientists can verify is "millions of years old." That might be what the machine read out, but somebody programmed that machine based on....what? Man's knowledge of the world we live in is very finite, and carbon dating is not an exact science because of just that...at some point even the most astute scientists start guessing and making stuff up. So "billions and billions of years" is the only way they can hide or justify the creation of the earth and the miracle of life. There is no "proof"....its all fabrication and guesswork. I prefer to keep asking "but why did that happen?" Even if you believe the big bang theory, there was a reason that happened...and it wasn't random. The bible is the only credible book that explains it in detail.

4. Dinosaurs (My favorite) - Dr. Ken Hovind aka Dr. Dino (www.drdino.com) explains the dinosaur phenomenon (to my understanding) like this...in the period after creation before the original sin was committed (the forbidden scandal) man lived to be hundreds of years old (look in the old testament) So if man lived that long, animals did too. Reptiles are the only animals that grow throughout their entire life cycle. So imagine that Geico (gecko) lizard, instead of living for 10-12 years as they do now, living for say 100-200 years or say a sea turtle that lives up to 80 years now...living to be 300-400 years old. You can see how they can get to be "dinosaur sized" pretty easily. What happened to them? Not some ice age or meteor shower, much simpler...the great flood. The bible says the great flood "destroyed all flesh." That meant animals too, as the entire earth was covered in water. For proof he cites some articles about seashells found atop Mount Everest and the Grand Canyon. Very Interesting.

So, I said all that to say that even though I am a Christian, in my unbiased opinion (because neither theory can be undoubtedly proven) Creation science (or Creationism or Creationology) should given proper consideration as a field of study. After all, the bible was actually taught in schools prior to the big political push after Darwin's "Origin of Species" hit it big with scientists. Funny because at that same period (1850's), doctors treated women's menstruation as a disease/disorder that could be treated with (male) doctors massaging the a woman's female parts...but I digress.

My point is that the creationist view is not/does not dispute stuff like photosynthesis, kreb's cycle, the periodic table, cell reproduction, physics, anatomy, etc. It really only focuses on the origin of man and the earth. So I think an ideal way to ease some of the tension in wanting to have this perspective taught in schools is to change the structure of science classes, with classes dedicated to the origin of the earth and man:

1) Creationist Origins or Creationology
2) Evolutionist Origins or Evolutionology

Make it a mandatory elective, meaning students must choose one or the other. The curricula obviously will start out different, but I would imagine somewhere along the midway of the school year, they would align...teaching the same fundamentals of geology, physics, biology and chemistry (i guess thats what they teach in k-12 now) I mean, how much time is spent on the "origins" of the earth and man in K-12 anyway? One chapter...just like civil rights. I think to deny kids the opportunity to learn about creationism in a school setting is short changing them. I think it would also instill a sense of ethics, something that is sorely missing in science today. Just because technology says we can doesn't always mean we should.