Re: Shapes of a Wedge

From: Jan de Koning <>
Date: Tue May 18 2004 - 14:36:24 EDT

At 12:19 PM 18/05/2004 -0400, Al Koop wrote:

>Jan, I agree with you that most Christians do not need to know the
>details of evolution, and that teaching it to many nonscientists who do
>not wish to spend the time learning all of the background is practically
>impossible. But, some of these people also seem to think that they then
>can tell scientsts and teachers of science what they should teach in a
>science class without doing their homwork (involving of years of time)
>to find out what evolution is all about. Scientists should be able to
>teach their theories in a coherent and consistent manner as agreed upon
>by those who have studied it thoroughly. To change things in science you
>should have to convince a significant number those who have studied the
>field thoroughly that they may be wrong. Instead with evolution there
>is an end run around this procedure by putting this scientific theory
>into the political arena.

That is indeed an unfortunate reality, and an un-Christian as well. It is
never right to enforce faith by law. Besides it does not work. As a
matter of fact, I am worried about the educational systems in our
countries. When I compare it to what we had to know at that age before
being admitted to the University I shudder. A people that does not have
knowledge is lost. Our countries draw many scientists from other
countries, but our own education systems should be improved.
I really do not have an answer to this difficulty, but we must show that we
are indeed Christians. If it comes up we should not avoid the discussions,
but discussions with people that do not want to listen is impossible
anyway. I really think, that our first task is to show that we are
"exemplary" Christians by our love. Even when they still have doubt about
what you say, they still respect you, and that is half the battle. In my
church some do not agree with me but still respect me as a "good" Christian
(their words.)

>Two weeks ago an article about an antievolutionary theme park in Florida
>was posted by Robert Schneider.
>It contained the following:
> From
> > Somewhat more creationist in approach is the Nerve-Wracking
> > Ball: a bowling ball on a rope, dangling from a tall tree
> > branch. A child stands before the ball, and then a park
> > guide gives it a shove from a specific angle, so that it
> > comes careering back at the child's face only to stop just
> > in front of it. The child wins if he does not flinch,
> > proving he has "faith in God's laws" - in this case, that a
> > swinging object will never come back higher than the point
> > from which it took off.
>How does one know which of the many human scientific theories are "God's
>laws" and worthy of a game in an antievolutionary amusement park?

Did you really think that the above was a good example of God's laws?

> And
>which of the many human scientific theories are "just theories" that can
>be voted out of science textbooks by some school board or state
>legislature on a political whim?
>Al Koop

No school board has such a "right". If they do that are playing "God" and
that is not allowed. Such a school board should be voted out. They are
overstepping their authority by judging about things they do not know. If
they really stay they are persecuting "religion" that is the church, and
the end will be worse than the beginning.

Jan de Koning
Received on Tue May 18 14:34:09 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue May 18 2004 - 14:34:10 EDT