I keep hearing how Evalgelical Christians are pushing to get creationism and intelligent design into public schools (presumably in science classes). Obviously, this is merely an attempt to inject religion into public schools in the guise of true science.

Now, I should say that I believe in God (although I do not believe that the Bible is literally true and I have grave doubts about many of the beliefs that Christians hold).

If Evangelicals want to inject religion into schools, wouldn't they be smart to avoid creationism and intelligenct design and instead actually use something related to religion that IS science? One of the basic tenets of science is that matter can neither be created or destroyed. If that is true, where did all of the "stuff" of the universe come from? That one point is the most compelling evidence that I can think of to justify the belief in God (whatever God may be). I think it would be useful, if for no other reason then to start the thinking process, to ask student where all the "stuff" of the universe came from if not from a creator.

Any thoughts?

__________________
"George W. Bush surrounds himself with smart people the way a hole surrounds itself with a donut." —Dennis Miller

With that same statement, matter can neither be created nor destroyed...

could easy 'prove' that there is no creator...

and the wheels on the bus go round and round...

It really couldn't. Unless science at some point discovers that matter can, in fact, be created and destroyed, the fact that matter exists seems to prove that some force outside reality created the matter. How else could the matter come to be?

__________________
"George W. Bush surrounds himself with smart people the way a hole surrounds itself with a donut." —Dennis Miller

Like I said earlier...the wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round...

then I could say again, since matter can not be created nor destroyed...there is no creator...

Then it goes into ones own belief system on how everything came to be...

and again the wheels on the bus go round and round....

Our local school district had a widely publicized debate when some Evangelical fool tried to bring I.D. into the science curriculum.

At the time, the Board was mostly conservative. Only one member actually understood the can of worms that they would've opened had they agreed with the I.D. advocates.

Keep in mind this Board had no qualms about being "rogue"; they're currently breaking California law by not giving students the right to medical confidentiality as guaranteed by the state laws. Now the Attorney General of the state is breathing down the district's neck.

Anyway, the I.D. guy lost. You should've heard his arguments: three out of four people support I.D. in schools (of course he never cited a source, for all we knew it was conducted in his church's parking lot). And then a scientist with a PhD in something slammed him, saying science isn't a democracy. He tried to come off as caring about “broadening” the student’s views, but most everyone saw through his façade. On top of it all, he even referred to his planned victory as a “springboard” for other schools. There was clearly an ulterior motive.

The real shame is that over $30,000 was spent on this issue (attorney fees, etc.) when it was clearly driven by political and ideological beliefs. Even students spoke at the board's meeting, in front of hundreds of people and cameras, to say that Darwinism wasn't being taught dogmatically in their classrooms. But more importantly, the students wanted the district to stop being political and focus on education.

To think, all that time and money wasted on something so stupid.

But in a way I think it's great that these creationists are resorting to I.D. It's the ultimate copout, signifying their real stance (Genesis) isn't valid enough, so they resort to some ambiguous stuff about a creator. The movement is clearly dying, especially as even the I.D. mandates gets shot down.

__________________
Proudly a "South Park Republican"

Evangelical Christians are wrong and correct in certain things.

The funny thing about creationism is that the Jewish Rabbis have interpreted differently in the Talmud and other Jewish sources present interpretations concerning "Creationism" of the Book of Genesis. Therefore, the Evangelical Christians are following the LITERAL meaning of the TORAH Genesis Book. Hypothetically, Jesus(pbuh) himself studied the Torah and eventually the Talmud with these interpetative sources. The evidence of Jesus(pbuh) upbringing creates a dillemma for Evangelical Christians or Christians in general.

In Islam, certains scholars have interpretated passages liberally or conservatively and some have even accepted theories which are not conservative nor liberal(Theory of Evolution). However, we find in Islamic sources that Prophet Adam(pbuh) was taller than the current human beings which suggest according to Islam a different form of interpretation for the physical evolution of human beings. Biblically, the literal meaning is to accept the normal height(which is a relative observation). The Islamic evidence suggests otherwise:

I am sure also that other belief systems have different presentations of human evolution or none at all. The question is would Evangelical Christians accept different versions of "creationism" in the schools also since we have different adherents of religion which express different forms of "creationism"?

Hasan

How can you ask a student to start a thinking process if you deny them the opportunity to learn about different theories. You say with your statement start a thinking process, let there be a choice. Yet you believe that there should be an information restriction.

__________________
lambaste me not

Yes, there should be information restriction:

If its not based on science, it shouldn't be in a science class. Its that simple.

Look: Christian morality is very useful. Christian Science is Poetry.

Evangelism is wrong: The bible is not literally true, as our friend Hasan has demonstrated on numerous occassions. The four Gospels prevent different versions of an event, and just plain different facts. In Matthew and Luke, They present two versions of the glorious paternal Lineage of Joseph, and up to david, none of the names are the same. Is Jesus an ancestor of Solomon? Matthew says yes, Luke says no. Read it yourself.

And presenting Genesis as scientific fact seems to be a good way to bury everything else in the bible.

__________________
"The belief that nothing exists outside your own mind--surely there must be some way of demonstrating that it was false" - 1984

1 Corinthians 3:10-15 American Standard Version
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...15;&version=8;

__________________
"The belief that nothing exists outside your own mind--surely there must be some way of demonstrating that it was false" - 1984

I never said science class should be Bible study. Science has not been able to determine what really created the earth, which means that Creationism is a valid theory and this is why at least teaching it in science class as a theory should be encouraged. I am amazed that people want to restrict information in the spirit of opening options for intellectual debate and discovery.

__________________
lambaste me not