Dover School Board Member Prayer report

If I had a dream that was contrary to God's written word... I would reject the authority of the dream, not the Bible.

 

Paul.
I think you're dreaming if you don't think he was lying about that dream.

 

Lots of Christians are dreamers. It isn't the dreamers who get the work of the ministry done.

 

I don't think evolution has ever been proved. I don't think any scientific theory is beyond questioning. The issue I struggle with is whether we really want to bring our faith about creation down to the level of a scientific theory. Faith is described in the Bible as:

Hbr 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Science, on the other hand, demands proof. Therefore, the Genesis story about God creating the heavens and earth will be subjected to the scientific method as will the accompanying theory of a young earth which many believe in. I know that the proposal is to teach intelligent design and not the Bible but I believe everyone knows what is really being proposed.

Do we have to "prove" the Bible or should we take it on faith? Nowhere does the Bible say that it requires proof. It requires faith. Are we really going to bring young people to salvation by subjecting the Bible to scientific testing?

 

If you consider science as being in more than three dimensional space then it is not proveable either. All things have a time component.

 

I agree, but what do you think of the tactic of pretending that what is being proposed does not have to do with God or the Bible? Do you think dishonest means are a good way to get this into schools?

 

I have heard though that there are some UNsaved scientists who are really looking hard at the "intelligent design" idea. They are unwilling to believe it was the God of the Bible and Biblical creation, but they look at the universe and can tell that there is order and design within it. So they want to compromise with the "intelligent design" idea.

I don't think that it is Christians pushing this (unless you can point to a specific group that BEGAN the idea), but I do agree that Christians have jumped on the band wagon in the hopes that it is a way to get any kind of alternative teaching into the school that even remotely resembles Biblical creation.

 

On the Dover school board, it was Christians who were pushing ID, and testimony has shown that they were pushing it for religious reasons, and later denied those reasons.

Further, the ID textbook they wanted to use, Of Pandas and People, is produced by the Foundation for Thought and Ethics. FTE's president lied under oath about the organization's purpose. In answer to the question, "Is the Foundation for Thought and Ethics a religious organization?" he responded, "No, it's not." In response to the question "Any religious message at all?" he responded, "No, none at all." During cross examination, FTE's filing for tax exemption was produced, on which the Statement of Organization's Primary Exempt Purpose was "promoting and publishing textbooks presenting a Christian perspective". Either Mr. Buell lied under oath, or the organization fraudulently obtained tax-exempt status.

Of course, don't take my word for it; this is all part of the public record and easily accessible to anyone. You can read [Mr. Buell's testimony] and decide for yourself. The pertinent pages are 43-44 and 83-91.

 

Oh, I should also add that on page 113 of the same transcript Mr. Buell claims that his organization gave rise the ID movement:

(The "two leading scientists" he refers to are Dr. Behe and Dr. Dembski.)

So, that ties this back in with what you said about pointing to a specific group that began the idea.

 

Mercury,

this group with the textbook is not the ones that first started presenting the idea of ID to the general public.

The idea of ID is taking hold within circles of secular scientists.

Im not talking about the push to get into the Dover schools specifically, Im talking about the general beginnings of the idea of ID itself.

Like I said, Christians have jumped on the bandwagon....as your example of FTE shows.

If the guy was lying in this particular case in order to get it in there through deceptive means, than thats wrong. It is possible though, that he did not realize the Christian ties of the book's producers. Mr. Buell may simply have not done his "homework". It does not necessarily mean that he lied OR that FTE obtained tax exempt status fraudulently.

 

I have no problem with an alternative theory being taught in schools. In fact, I think it OUGHT to be taught. School is about learning, and if we want to be intellectually honest we teach all sides of the story in our public schools.

 

On this we most certainly agree.

Maybe I wasn't clear. FTE is the book's producer. Mr. Buell is the president of this organization. That tax form showing a religious purpose is for FTE, the same organization he claimed had no religious purpose.

 

Oh! lol Well then if he's the president I suppose he had better know what he's talking about!

I did NOT notice that part! Whew! Glad you cleared that one up........

I like to explore every possibility before Im willing to actually say hey, that was wrong.....

My husband is exhausted much of the time.

 

So, when history teachers teach about the Holocaust, they should also mention that there's another theory that the Holocaust didn't happen?

When astronomy teachers teach about the solar system, they should also teach the other viewpoint that the planets and sun orbit the earth?

When chemistry teachers teach about the periodic table, they should also teach the theory of alchemy?

Or, should just the theories widely accepted by experts in the field be taught?

 

Come on now, the holocaust is not a theory. It is a documented event, with eye witnesses, video witnesses, and written documentation as well.

They DO teach the alternate viewpoint on the center of the universe, if they teach what Galileo was disagreeing with.....right? At least I learned that when I was in school. Of course, I went to a Christian school, and they teach us evolution, too.

I also learned the theory of alchemy in school, though I never took chemistry so I don't know how far that would have gone....
It certainly would make a good subject for student experimentation though, wouldnt it?

 

Okay, let's ignore the Holocaust example because it's not in the field of science and it's also so loaded (I probably shouldn't have mentioned it).

You mentioned you were taught about geocentric theory and alchemy. Were you taught these things as a history lesson, or as valid theories that may be correct? Would you want them presented to children as plausible alternatives to heliocentric theory and the atomic theory, even though scientists don't believe they are?

 

valid questions, Mercury.

I was taught alchemy as a history lesson, true. And I guess you could say the same thing about geocentric theory. But are there scientists alive today who still hold to these viewpoints?

When it comes to creationism and intelligent design there are respected members of the scientific communities who currently believe in each of them. I think because of that they ought to have a fair representation in our public schools. Right now the students are taught as if evolution is a FACT.....though we use the term "theory" for it constantly, and yes, theory is defined for them as well. But the common man out there is definitely being presented with evolution as if it is proven fact. Add to that the fact that in the school they will not even acknowledge that there ARE alternate ideas out there, held by real scientists with real degrees and real evidence.

 

Let me say, too, I believe Christian schools are more open in their willingness to teach kids the at least ABOUT the alternate view. We dont claim to be objective, so I don't believe there is as much of a need for them to.

But I know a young man in our high school who just did a science project on the geocentric theory, last year. He tried to prove that the earth really is the center of the universe. He got a good grade because he made good points, researched thoroughly, and presented his material well.

In public schools, if a student tries to write a paper on creationism he'd probably get a failing grade, no matter how good of a job he did presenting his ideas. Ive seen this happen, thats how I know. Dont know about that for ID, its newer.