When I was a Sophomore in High School, I took a Biology class from a very engaging and knowledgeable teacher who, on our first day of that class, gave us a unique assignment that was to be completed in class. He requested that we briefly write about whether we believe in Creationism or in Evolution, and to explain why. After collecting our responses, he read some of them out loud to the class, tossing away any that supported Creationism, while reading through the few that embraced the Theory of Evolution all the way through with a subtle nod of approval. Many of these were, in my opinion, not well written; but it didn't matter since they apparently demonstrated enough intellectual insight as to conform to the belief of the scientific community. On the other hand, appeals to a faith-based theory of the origin of life were eschewed as primitive, unenlightened, and wholly lacking critical thought.
At the time, I thought little of this exercise, which of course was the prelude to a class whose foundation was Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution. A decade later, however, I witnessed this conflict resurface in the academic community with renewed vehemence. Parents would oppose the teaching of the Theory of Evolution with futility, while any teacher who suggested that life could have been created by God, or even by means of the more neutral "intelligent design" were reprimanded for teaching something that was not science. To no one's surprise, many disillusioned families continue to withdraw their children from public school to either homeschool, or to send them to a private school that ensures a solid religious opinion on topics of science, history, and reading. This decision is often criticized for failing to adequately prepare students for higher education, where a solid understanding of Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a requirement especially in science degrees.
Eventually, every student must resolve this conflict within him or herself. On this philosophy alone, one is immediately classified as either an intellectual and a critical thinker or a theologian and a religious person. Just as it is in politics, where one is expected to be either a liberal or a conservative, a student must choose one of these two beliefs, as though it were not possible for both or even neither to be correct. In fact, Evolution and Creationism are what we may nominate a "false dichotomy". It is not an either/or proposition.
To round out this concept, we must retreat to a more basic discipline: philosophy. Philosophy is the essence of how one comes to learn truth, and how one defines truth. Truth may be defined as "things as they really are" and for the sake of simplicity, one may approach this in one of two ways: truth is relative, or truth is absolute. I believe truth is absolute. This philosophy stabilizes my world view, and my self-concept. Absolute truth does not change based on what people believe or say, but it is immutable and composes a sphere that is greater than I am. On the other hand, a belief in relative truth is unstable and weak, since it subjugates everything to an individual's beliefs, passions, vices, appetites, and whims. This can do nothing except destroy that man who embraces a belief in relative truth, as he can never elevate himself above his self-exalted post.
Accepting now that all truth is absolute, we must now ponder how truth is learned and understood. In short, how do we know that something is true? Also, from whence does truth originate? I believe that God is the author of all truth, and therefore, God knows all truth. This belief that God is over everything, and that He is our Heavenly Father is the foundation of my faith, and therefore my religion.
I believe that my existence on Earth is a key part of His eternal plan for me, and for everyone. I believe that the universe that He created is governed by eternal laws, (or eternal truths) which must deal justly with people like me who sin, and therefore are unfit to dwell in the presence of God, who is perfect and without sin. I believe that our Heavenly Father loves us so much that He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to conquer death through His Resurrection, and to atone for the sins of the world, thus allowing the repentant sinner to be cleansed from sin and overcome death in order to return to our Heavenly Father. What I believe to be the "Gospel" or "good news" of Jesus Christ is the manner of living that He has ordained for us to live in order for His grace, or in other words, the power of his atonement to work in our lives to the perfectioning of our immortal souls. I know this, because Jesus Christ proclaimed of himself in the Holy Bible in the Book of John "I am the way, the truth, and the light". Jesus Christ, like His Father, is the way to all truth. This profound belief that I have is truth that I have learned through the medium which God has appointed that all truth may be learned by man: through the Holy Spirit. The Book of Mormon, a volume of ancient scripture that, like the Bible, contains the fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, teaches in the Book of Moroni that "by the power of the Holy Ghost, ye may know the truth of all things". Thus, truth is understood by that sublime power.
Drawing this within the context of education, I believe that God's plan for us is to learn about things that are on this earth, as well as those things which pertain to a heavenly sphere. I believe that it is important for us to obtain as much education as possible, and to acquire knowledge of things that are true. What we call "science" is the means by which come to discover truth. Indeed, the history of the world is a chronicle of knowledge being compounded upon knowledge, and discovery being made upon discovery. It is a story of learning, and continual advancement. From spears to firearms, from horses to airplanes, from monarchy to republic, and from scrolls to cell phones, mankind continues to advance in knowledge and understanding because of discoveries that are made about how the universe really is. Just like the earth did not suddenly become round when man discovered that it was round, science is not always synonymous with truth. Our scientific understanding of how things are is the product of observation, hypothesis, testing, retesting, conclusion, theory, and then continuing to repeat the cycle. When something continues to demonstrate a similar result (something that we call "empirical evidence") we then assume that things are really as we see them. The very essence of science applauds continual skepticism, as it should, yet this does not seem to apply to elements of science that appear at times to serve little purpose except to attack tenets of Christian faith. That is, the scientific community is ready to go to arms over the suggestion that the universe may be the product of something greater than ourselves, that we do not as of yet fully comprehend. I understand that it is not proper for science to work in reverse, that is, it should not seek evidence simply because it has been written in scripture. However, is there not room in this ardently secular school of thought to admit that we may not and cannot have all of the answers by relying on our own abilities?
This is exactly why science should not oppose religion any more than religion should oppose science. Albert Einstein is credited with having said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind". They are not mutually exclusive, nor are they acronyms. Instead, both are means by which mankind can come to understand truth, and have knowledge of things as they really are. As future homeschool teachers, we intend to convey this idea to our pupils. For my part, I love science, and I am ever fascinated and ever learning the elements of this wonderful and key discipline of education. In the spirit of a scientist, I question what I observe; and based upon what I believe to be true as revealed by the Holy Spirit (as every search for truth has its foundation), there are some tenets of conventional scientific wisdom that I simply cannot believe. It does not mean that I will not teach them, but I certainly cannot, with a clear conscience, teach them as though they were truth. This deviant approach to education will most likely serve a community of like-minded thinkers. If we are perfectly candid, it must be observed that most significant discoveries were made by those who did not share the view of their peers.
No comments:
Post a Comment