THE FOURTH REASON
The fourth reason Christians ought to love Darwin and the Big Bang is because it provides a way to deal with the longstanding problem of what to teach about science and religion in the public schools. This is certainly a very old problem, one going back to the famous Scopes "Monkey Trial" in Dayton, Tennessee in the 1920's.
Unfortunately, Christians have generally come out on the losing end in court cases, the courts pretty much always ruling that Christian efforts to present alternatives to Darwinian science are unacceptable. Many would argue that everyone – Christian and non-Christian alike – has lost out, the reason being is because teachers and schools are so afraid of this issue they shy away from teaching anything. Some would argue that students are simply being taught "junk". I believe that my proposed approach can come to the rescue, offering benefits to all:
- NonChristians will be happy because good science will be taught
- Christians will be happy because they will be able to build the set of arguments they've always wanted taught in schools, but simply haven't been able to advance, until now.
Sounds like a pretty bold claim – and it is – but let me show you how I believe I can make it.
Let's go back to the great fear that Christians have had about Darwin. I think there have been two: 1) that Darwin is inconsistent with the Biblical narrative; and 2) that it hypothesizes a world without purpose, and one without God, so students will be taught that the atheistic conception is correct. Elsewhere I've shown how Darwin is clearly not inconsistent with the Biblical narrative, so we can definitely dispose of that objection. Let's now turn to the other objection. My proposal will provide atheists and other non-Christians with something they've always wanted – to teach Darwin in the schools – but it will come at a cost they haven't considered, one that Christians will definitely like.
Let me explain how I think the subject of Darwin and the Big Bang should be taught in schools. Bear with me, because if you're a Christian, I think you'll like where this is going. As I've argued in my book, I think the schools should teach that the Big Bang and Darwin's theory are essentially correct, so let's teach that in the schools. Atheists should love that, so what might their objection be? Well, the problem that arises for atheists is that, just as Christians are practicing religion, atheists really are, too. They'll object mightily to this, but let me show you why they actually are practicing religion. If the schools follow through with what I'm suggesting, it should be fairly obvious.
So here's what I think should be taught in the schools. First, the Big Bang is our best explanation for how the universe began, about 13.8 billion years ago. From that, the universe, as well as life, emerged and evolved to the present. Here, though, is the big question: what caused the Big Bang? Christians, as well as adherents of other religions, believe that God, or some type of God-like agent, caused it. Atheists, of course, believe that it more or less happened by chance. Who's right, and what proof is there? Let's consider the alternatives.
The question of the cause of the Big Bang is an excellent opportunity for schools of all sorts to teach the scientific method. Pretty much everyone believes it's a good idea for children to learn the scientific method, they just haven't thought about it in this context. So let's demonstrate the scientific method in the context of the question, who or what caused the Big Bang?
Teachers at all levels could describe the following experiment. Imagine that there is a giant wall, with all humanity on one side of the wall and an unknown world on the other side of the wall. The question is, what's on the other side of the wall, and how can scientists prove it, one way or the other? So imagine that a group of scientists get the very best scientific equipment available and aim it at the wall to determine what's on the other side of the wall. Now even young children are familiar with X ray machines, if only because they may have seen them at airport screening. Imagine that the scientists aim all of their sophisticated equipment at the wall, but despite their best efforts, the equipment provides absolutely no information about what's on the other side of the wall. The question is, what conclusions can the scientists draw about what's on the other side of the wall?
The obvious answer is, nothing! If there are no data produced by the machines about what's on the other side of the wall, it remains a mystery what is on the other side. Since no data are available, any conclusions reached are in the realm of speculation, and possibly religion. I say this because one of the definitions of "faith" is belief in things that are unseen and not provable. The experiment I've described is a perfect example of our understanding of what happened before the Big Bang. Right now, we have absolutely no data points, so the experiment I've described pretty well summarizes our understanding of the "cause" of the Big Bang. The scientific method dictates that we can reach no other conclusion than that, at least at this time. So if someone tries to draw conclusions about the cause of the Big Bang, it means they're moving from the realm of science and into the realm of the metaphysical or religious.
Christians, as well as adherents of other religions, believe that God caused the Big Bang, but what proof is there of that? Well, unfortunately, there is no proof. As such, the belief that God caused the Big Bang is a faith statement – a belief in something that is neither provable nor seen. Absolutely no surprise in that! Religious people have always understood that at some point, at some level, there was no way to prove what they believe. For Christians and other religious people, our conclusion that God is on the other side of "the wall" is understood to be a religious statement.
The problem, though, is that the very same principles apply to atheists. Let me show you why. Recall, there is absolutely no data from our hypothetical experiment about what is on the other side of the wall, so any conclusions drawn are religious or metaphysical. That means that the conclusions of atheists about the cause of the Big Bang are, well, faith propositions because there is absolutely no data to back up the statement. Yes, while atheists insist they're not practicing religion, they actually are, because they're making claims that they dress up as scientific, but are not based upon science.
Thus, everyone benefits, for the following reasons: 1) good science is being taught in the schools; 2) children are learning about the boundaries between science and religion; and 3) no one needs to worry that a particular religious view is being taught. Christians should also be pleased because children will be taught that the claims of atheists are, like those of Christians, merely faith statements, so any conclusions drawn are beyond science.
Christians, of course, can rest assured that the case doesn't end there. After all, as I've pointed out elsewhere, the real "line in the sand" Christians should be drawing is not how the world was created. Instead, the "line" is the Garden of Eden, the reason being that the core of Christian beliefs are derived from that event: 1) mankind is sinful; 2) we have a dynamic God who cares about us; 3) we can't overcome sin on our own; and 4) Christ's death and resurrection are the atonement for our sin. As I've noted elsewhere, Christians can build a strong case out of Darwin that leads directly to the Garden of Eden.
Based upon this understanding, an embrace of Darwin and the Big Bang will benefit Christians, especially those who have been concerned about what is taught to children in school.
