Colossian Blog
October 18, 2017 | Jennifer Vander Molen

Why Some Christian Schools Are Teaching Evolution

One of the reasons Jim Klima sent his son to Front Range Christian School (FRCS) in Littleton, Colorado, is that he knew the school taught that God created the earth in six days. After his son attended a symposium offered by the school where a proponent of evolution explained his views to students, Klima attended a follow-up session later that evening.

“We had an interesting discussion over dinner,” he laughed.

Why would a Christian school that holds to a young-earth creationist point-of-view invite an evolutionist to address its students?

“It’s foundational to who we are,” explained FRCS head of school, David Cooper. “Yes, we’re a young-earth creationist school, but if we’re going create Christian scholars who will be respected and heard, they’ve got to be able to engage in the scientific dialogue with meaningful knowledge. At the same time, we also want our students to learn how to discuss sensitive issues in a way that honors Christ.”

To that end, FRCS partnered with us at The Colossian Forum and offered a day-long Symposium on Origins featuring two scientists: Dr. Todd Wood, a young-earth creationist and Dr. Darrel Falk, who believes God used evolution to create the earth.

“We want our community to be able to speak their convictions with boldness and courage, but also be able to hold love as part of the process too,” Kevin Taylor, director of the school’s Veritas et Caritas Institute and a Spanish teacher said. “When the world looks at the church, I’d like them to see it appealing because we behave virtuously and civilly in a world so polarized.”

Why Teach Evolution?

Many Christian schools embrace young-earth creationism, likely for the same reason as Klima: they want an alternative to the evolution that is being taught in public schools.

However, when those Christian-school students graduate and head off to college—even to some Christian colleges—they are expected to have at least a rudimentary understanding of evolution. Christian colleges such as Calvin College, Taylor University, Spring Arbor University, Seattle Pacific University, Point Loma Nazarene University, Samford University, and others generally teach from an evolutionary perspective in their science departments, as do virtually all non-religious affiliated colleges and universities.

Introducing evolution to Christian-school students is not without its challenges. Head of school Cooper acknowledges resistance from some parents.

“We ask them to be patient, to trust us, but I know it’s difficult for some,” he said.

Teachers also approach it with mixed feelings. Leslie Bloomquist, who teaches advanced placement biology at FRCS, covers a large unit on evolution with her ninth-graders.

“If I didn’t, my students would have a very hard time taking their standardized tests required by the state because there’s just so much evolution on those tests. But I don’t feel real comfortable teaching it.”

Though not every state includes questions about evolution on their mandatory student assessments, an increasing number do. In a 2005 questionnaire sent by Education Week to twenty-two states, seventeen reported at least one question on their tests specifically mentioned evolution—some tests had as many as seven questions about evolution.

How Do We Have This Conversation?

At the FRCS symposium, approximately 250 middle and high-school students listened to Wood and Falk explain their views on origins and then question each other. Students also met in small groups to share their own thoughts on science and faith and interact with the scientists.

“There’s definitely disagreement on this topic among the students here,” eleventh-grader Carissa Van Donselaar explained. “This event has helped us learn how to talk about our opinions without fighting each other, and that’s so important because the image that non-believers have of Christians is that we’re always fighting over something.”

Both Wood and Falk have been meeting privately for the past three years with The Colossian Forum, putting to test the ministry’s belief that “all things hold together in Christ.” Both believe the other is not only wrong, but harming the church as they promote their respective views of origins.

“Todd believes my views could lead students away from faith, while I believe the young-earth creationist view makes it easy for scientists to dismiss the Christian faith altogether, and we really need a Christian presence in the larger scientific community,” Falk explained.

“It has not always been easy because, in a way, Darrel Falk is a mortal enemy of creationism,” noted Wood. “In fact, sometimes our discussion gets quite heated, but we’ve been able to have these difficult conversations and still remain friends.”

Both credit TCF for providing a God-honoring process for dealing with conflict.

“Our role is simply to remind them what they already believe, which is that the gospel is relevant and powerful—especially where there’s conflict,” Michael Gulker, president of TCF, said.

“Rather than being a threat to the faith, conflict actually gives us an opportunity to let the gospel work in us and in our culture in ways the culture can no longer imagine. In doing so, we have the opportunity to witness to the reconciling power of the Prince of Peace. It’s great to be able to show the next generation of Christians that it’s possible to contend for what you believe in a way that honors Christ.”

How Can We Utilize These Resources?

teachFASTly.com is a faith and science teaching resource curated by TCF and Kuyers Institute. Faith and Science Teaching (FAST) helps equip high school teachers to engage big questions around faith and science with confidence and creativity. FAST aims to use the way young people consider these big questions as occasions to press into Christian virtue.

The teachFASTly.com site is filled with a large collection of teaching activities, training materials, background essays, book reviews, and more.

Where faith and science are so often seen as a source of conflict, FAST creates a space in which teachers and students are invited to engage them as a fruitful opportunity to learn and grow. FAST explores hard questions with integrity, encouraging the very best teaching practices within the context of Christian faithfulness.

We hope teachFASTly is a great asset to teach science well in a Christian context.

Suggested Posts
The Dying Art of Disagreement
October 25, 2017 | Jennifer Vander Molen
The Dying Art of Disagreement
This is the text of a lecture from New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, delivered at the Lowy Institute Media Award dinner in Sydney, Australia, on Saturday, Sept. 23. The award recognizes excellence in Australian foreign affairs journalism.  To say the words, “I agree” — whether it’s agreeing to join an organization, or submit to a political authority, or subscribe to a religious faith — may be the basis of every community. But to say, I disagree; I refuse; you’re wrong; etiam si omnes — ego non — these are the words that define our individuality, give us our freedom, enjoin our tolerance, enlarge our perspectives, seize our attention, energize our progress, make our democracies real, and give hope and courage to oppressed people everywhere. Galileo and Darwin; Mandela, Havel, and Liu Xiaobo; Rosa Parks and Natan Sharansky — such are the ranks of those who disagree. And the problem, as I see it, is that we’re failing at the task. This is a puzzle. At least as far as far as the United States is concerned, Americans have rarely disagreed more in recent decades. We disagree about racial issues, bathroom policies, health care laws, and, of course, the 45th president. We express our disagreements in radio and cable TV rants in ways that are increasingly virulent; street and campus protests that are increasingly violent; and personal conversations that are increasingly embittering. This is yet another age in which we judge one another morally depending on where we stand politically. Nor is this just an impression of the moment. Extensive survey data show that Republicans are much more right-leaning than they were twenty years ago, Democrats much more left-leaning, and both sides much more likely to see the other as a mortal threat to the nation’s welfare. The polarization is geographic, as more people live in states and communities where their neighbors are much likelier to share their politics. The polarization is personal: Fully 50 percent of Republicans would not want their child to marry a Democrat, and nearly a third of Democrats return the sentiment. Interparty marriage has taken the place of interracial marriage as a family taboo. Finally the polarization is electronic and digital, as Americans increasingly inhabit the filter bubbles of news and social media that correspond to their ideological affinities. We no longer just have our own opinions. We also have our separate “facts,” often the result of what different media outlets consider newsworthy. In the last election, fully 40 percent of Trump voters named Fox News as their chief source of news. It’s usually the case that the more we do something, the better we are at it. Instead, we’re like Casanovas in reverse: the more we do it, the worse we’re at it. Our disagreements may frequently hoarsen our voices, but they rarely sharpen our thinking, much less change our minds. It behooves us to wonder why. Read the rest of this lecture on The New York Times' website. 
Reforming Political Discourse: A Respectful Conversation
September 20, 2017 | Jennifer Vander Molen
Reforming Political Discourse: A Respectful Conversation
The political climate surrounding both the Obama and Trump presidencies is marked by hyper-partisan attitudes. Much of the rhetoric centers around “we’ll do this without you” from the majority party and “if you’re for it, we’re against it” from the minority party. Every available political tool is wielded to defeat what the other side wants to do. The news from the right and left often seems to be covering different planets. Many people appear to be listening only to an echo of themselves. Policy discussion is marked by talking points that inflame one side and caricature the other. This melee teaches us how not to communicate with each other. Families and communities are so divided that political discussion and life together becomes uncomfortable and sometimes impossible. Do Christians have resources for working together across political differences? Can we offer an alternative to the current appalling state of political discourse? We think so. Our senior fellow at TCF, Harold Heie, is hosting a new digital conversation on Reforming our Political Discourse on his website, Respectful Conversation. This digital conversation will feature: Proposing a Christian perspective on political discourse Discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed Christian perspective Modeling the proposed Christian perspective by discussing the nature of politics and selected contentious public policy issues Discussing a possible way forward for Christians Each topic in this 10-month dialog features two conversation partners with significant disagreements in the subject matter. The hope for this project is to show how people on opposite sides of conflict demonstrate respect for one another and discover common ground that fosters ongoing conversation. We hope you'll join us for this enlightening and thought-provoking conversation!