14 CSE • Volume V Number 2 • 2001–2002

Students whoestablish biblical

foundations sothey can build

their worldviewswith integrity

will have astructure that

holds together,no matter whatthey learn from

the scientificprocess.

What are the Issues?

Sandy is excited about her advanced-placement environmental science class

and is looking at majoring in that fieldwhen she attends college. What are herthoughts and concerns as she chooses aschool? “Will I be humiliated when I go touniversity just because I believe that Godcreated everything? If I try to represent aChristian viewpoint in a discussion, will Iget verbally abused? How can I go to col-lege confident rather than feeling I have tobe an undercover Christian?”

As teachers, how can we help our stu-dents recognize and deal with the keyissues? What are the various views in theorigins debate? What are the truly crucialissues, and which things have “sapped vitalenergy from the Christian community”?(Miller 1993, 1)

As a teacher, I have tried over the years togive young people the worldview founda-tion they need to rise to the challenge ofwhatever the world throws at them andmeet it with calm, reasoned responses.Students who establish biblical foundationsso they can build their worldviews withintegrity will have a structure that holdstogether, no matter what they learn fromthe scientific process.

Backgrounds Christian schools may provide In general, in over 30 years of teaching—

25 in Christian schools, overseas and in theStates—I’ve observed that evangelical and/orconservative Christian elementary schoolsencourage students to accept the biblicaldescription of creation at face value, that is,six 24-hour days. Teachers present primarilywhat the Bible says and then move on tostudy the results of creation. Parents of stu-dents in evangelical/conservative Christianschools rarely inquire about the details of

what is taught in this area, as long as theydon’t hear anything heretical at home.

At the secondary level, life science teach-ers need a coherent position in order to beresponsible Christian scholars. Studentsstart to notice discrepancies between whatnon-Christian textbooks say and what theyhear at home or in the media, what theyremember from elementary school, whatthey hear at church, or what they hear theirteachers in other classes say. During thiscrucial time, how do we help students dis-cern truth and avoid getting caught up inthe counterproductive emotional aspects ofthis controversy at the expense of truth?More importantly, in areas where the fulltruth isn’t known and perhaps can’t be thisside of heaven, how can students developthe necessary confidence that faith in thebiblical God isn’t irrational?

Various views out thereThere is a wide range in what Bible-

believing, evangelical, conservative, matureChristians believe about origins. I’ve seenroughly five positions of scientists in theorigins debate: antitheistic macroevolution,theistic evolution, the day-age perspective,continuous creation, and the literal six 24-hour creation day model provided inGenesis. Bible-believing Christians fall intothe last four camps. The Institute forCreation Research advocates the last, oryoung-earth position. (ICR: “Tenets”2001) Reasons to Believe provides an old-earth perspective, referred to as the day-agemodel, interpreting the days of Genesis asrepresenting periods in the earth’s history.RTB bases its position on current radiomet-ric dating methods and results, essentiallyaccepting what has become conventionalscientific dogma. (RTB: “What We Believe”2001) Continuous creation, called evolving

Equipping Students with BiblicalFoundations for ScienceWill Our Students Be Ready for the Battle?

Ed Tulloch is currently educational technology coordinator at Dalat School in Penang, Malaysia, wherehe teaches Introduction to Computer Applications, Computer Communications Technology, WorldviewDevelopment and Apologetics to seniors, and health (just to maintain perspective). Since 1969 he hastaught science and computer courses in US public and private schools as well as overseas. Ed and his wifehave taught at the Dalat school for 19 years. They have three children.

$CSE_Quark_22.qxd 11/21/2001 11:44 AM Page 14

CSE • Volume V Number 2 • 2001–2002 15

The science-teachingestablishmenthas been quite clear in fighting creationist perspectives.

Ed TullochEquipping Students with Biblical Foundations for Science

creation, seems to skate over the literaldetails of Genesis and focus on the church’sGod-given mission, “to live as God’s imagebearers, exercising stewardship over Hiscreation and proclaiming His message ofreconciliation to the world.” (Miller 1993,1) This model expects the natural world toprovide “a reliable record of its past histo-ry.” (Ibid.) Theistic evolution holds thatGod used the mechanism of macroevolu-tion and takes more of a metaphorical viewof the Genesis account of creation.

I have come to the conclusion that oneconclusive, scientifically supportable truth inthe area of origins does not exist at this time.The issue lies in what is the underlying faithposition that accompanies the view morethan in which view is correct. We can argueabout whether yom means a 24-hour day aswe know it or whether its context favors oneof its other two meanings (Schaeffer 1972,57; Frye 1983, 13), but if qualified scholarshaven’t come to a consensus, perhaps weshould stop arguing and try to learn fromstudying creation. “We need to rememberthat God has found us and that he is in con-trol.” (Aal 2001) Francis Schaeffer, inGenesis in Space and Time, sums up the timefactor by saying, “In the light of the word[for day] as used in the Bible and the lack offinality of science concerning the problem ofdating, in a sense there is no debate becausethere are no clearly defined terms uponwhich to debate.” (Schaeffer 1972, 57)

What will students experience at college?When they attend state and non-

Christian (or nonevangelical) colleges anduniversities, students will face essentiallyonly evolutionary explanations for originsin the life sciences, as well as the ramifica-tions of these explanations throughout thesocial sciences. The science-teaching estab-lishment has been quite clear in fightingcreationist perspectives. Chuck Colson citesone publication of the National Associationof Biology Teachers that says, “Creationbeliefs … ‘have no place in the science class-room.’ ” (2000, 46)

Do all Christian colleges that call them-selves evangelical teach one perspective?No, according to their biology departmenthome pages on the Web and what I’m toldby former students, there is flexibility for a

variety of views, some specifically advocat-ed, others presented as possible explana-tions for the universe. For evangelicalschools, these perspectives cover the entirerange mentioned above while still adheringto God as Creator.

Most Christians would say they believethat the God of the Bible created everythingand that the Bible is their source of infor-mation on who God is and what He is like.Beyond that, they focus on practicality—determining how to live life (faith and prac-tice) and how to deal with today’s issuesfrom a biblical perspective.

Many colleges couch their philosophiesin terms that allow for a range of ideas onexactly how God created. Dordt Collegeexpresses it this way: “We see biology as thestudy of God’s creation, and we teach stu-dents not just about the nature of livingthings, but also how to become caring stew-ards of creation.” (Dordt Biology Programhome page, 2001)

Geneva College presents as thorough,realistic, and encouraging a philosophy as islikely to be found in a Christian liberal artscollege or university. I recommend that allbiology teachers read it. It begins with this:

Therefore, we are committed to the doctrineof creation. At the same time, we represent adiversity of views about the mechanism whichGod employed in creating “all things visibleand invisible.” (Nicene Creed) We feel it isimportant to distinguish between the processof evolution and the worldview of evolution-ism. That organisms evolve at least withinspecies, sometimes called micro-evolution, isundeniable. That this evolution is an adequateexplanation of the origin of all living things,i.e., evolutionism, is antithetical to our faith asBible-believing Christians. (Geneva BiologyDepartment home page, 2001)

Most other colleges surveyed did notaddress the issue of origins. If theyexpressed anything at all about a mission ora philosophy, particularly dealing with ori-gins, they took a view allowing the greatestpossible latitude regarding mechanismsGod might have used in creation.

Preparing our studentsWhether we’re card-carrying anti-theists

or ICR evangelists, all of us take a faith

$CSE_Quark_22.qxd 11/21/2001 11:44 AM Page 15

16 CSE • Volume V Number 2 • 2001–2002

Our studentsneed to know

that their biblical

Christianworldview is

able to answerthe questions

any worldviewmust answer.

Ed TullochEquipping Students with Biblical Foundations for Science

position because we choose to believethings we can’t conclusively prove throughempirical scientific methodology or byexperience. We approach what weencounter in the world with presupposi-tions. Students need to know that. If theirfaith is truly biblical faith, it’s reasonable—not a blind leap.

Our students need to know that theirbiblical Christian worldview is able toanswer the questions any worldview mustanswer:

1Creation—Where did we come from,and who are we?

2Fall—What has gone wrong with theworld?

3Redemption—What can we do to fix it?

“Only Christianity provides credible,defensible answers to life’s most crucialquestions, and only Christianity offers a rea-sonable strategy for how we are to live inthe real world.” (Colson and Pearcey 1999,xiii)

Next, we need to help our students learnto recognize the underlying presuppositionspeople have (their faith positions) and theconsequences of believing those founda-tional ideas. We also need to clearly presentwhat has been discovered. The work of peo-ple like Michael Behe, dealing with issues ofintelligent design and irreducible complexi-ty, has been particularly interesting:

The simplicity that was once expected to be thefoundation of life has proven to be a phantom;instead, systems of horrendous, irreduciblecomplexity inhabit the cell. The resulting real-ization that life was designed by an intelligenceis a shock to us in the 20th century who havegotten used to thinking of life as the result ofsimple natural laws. (Colson 2000, 49)

No FearCan we encourage our Christian young

people that we can pursue learning aboutthe creation without fear of discoveringanything real that will destroy our faith?That’s probably one of the most importantconcepts we can teach. We tend to thinkthat if we can’t explain everything, we’refailing God, the faith, and our children.

Science is tentative. We know that truescience is the study of that which can beobserved. Why can’t we relax and enjoy thestruggles inherent in decoding creation?

Science is a practical tool for approximatingtruth. Though there is probably no influ-ence more pervasive in our society than sci-ence and though it has produced a revolu-tion in human thought unprecedented inhistory, science is not infallible. Truth, infact, takes precedence over science. Let cre-ationists frankly acknowledge that theircommitment to creation depends at least asmuch on faith as on science. The evolution-ists are not better off. We can and shouldexceed them in honesty. (Frair and Davis1983, 21)

It’s not comfortable to live in uncertain-ty, but it’s a good test of our view of God’ssovereignty. Can we openly express thatuncertainty to our students? God is bigenough to handle our doubts and our nec-essary ignorance. It’s our unnecessary igno-rance we need to address. We can’t send stu-dents out if they are unaware of the spec-trum of ideas being discussed and studied,and we can’t send them out if they are fear-ful that something will be discovered thatwill demolish their faith. We must equip ourstudents with the rock solid foundationneeded to weather life’s increasingly haz-ardous path.

ReferencesAal, L. “Musings on the

Magisteria.” Unpublished thesis,via email, 2001.

Colson, C., Prison FellowshipMinistries. Answers to Your Kids’Questions. Wheaton, IL: TyndaleHouse, 2000.

Colson, C., and N. Pearcey. HowNow Shall We Live? Waco, TX:Word, 1999.

Dordt College Biology Program.Available: <www.dordt.edu/ aca-demics/departments/biology/pro-

gram.shtml>Frair, W., and P. Davis. A Case for

Creation, 3d ed. Chicago:Moody, 1980.

Frye, R. M., ed. Is God aCreationist? New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons, 1983.

Geneva College BiologyDepartment. Available:<www.geneva.edu/about_gene-va/academic/undergraduate/biolo-gy/bio_christian_view.html>

Miller, K. B. “TheologicalImplications of an Evolving

Creation.” Perspectives inScience and Christian Faith 45(1993): 150–160. Available:<www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1993/PSCF9-93Miller.html>

Schaeffer, F. A. Genesis in Spaceand Time: The Flow of BiblicalHistory. Wheaton, IL:InterVarsity, 1972.

AppendixThe Institute of Creation Researchbelieves in the following “Tenets ofBiblical Creationism”:

$CSE_Quark_22.qxd 11/23/2001 1:02 PM Page 16

CSE • Volume V Number 2 • 2001–2002 17

We need to helpour studentslearn to recognizethe underlyingpresuppositionspeople have and the consequences of believing thosefoundationalideas.

Ed TullochEquipping Students with Biblical Foundations for Science

The Creator of the universe is a tri-une God: Father, Son, and HolySpirit. There is only one eternal andtranscendent God, the source of allbeing and meaning, and He existsin three Persons, each of whomparticipated in the work of creation.

The Bible, consisting of the thir-ty-nine canonical books of the OldTestament and the twenty-sevencanonical books of the NewTestament, is the divinely inspiredrevelation of the Creator to man. Itsunique, plenary, verbal inspirationguarantees that these writings, asoriginally and miraculously given,are infallible and completelyauthoritative on all matters withwhich they deal, free from error ofany sort, scientific and historical aswell as moral and theological.

All things in the universe werecreated and made by God in the sixliteral days of the creation weekdescribed in Genesis 1:1–2:3, andconfirmed in Exodus 20:8–11. Thecreation record is factual, historical,and perspicuous; thus all theoriesof origins or development whichinvolve evolution in any form arefalse. All things which now existare sustained and ordered by God’sprovidential care. However, a partof the spiritual creation, Satan andhis angels, rebelled against Godafter the creation and are attempt-ing to thwart His divine purposes increation. <www.icr.org/abouticr/tenets.htm>

Reasons to Believe holds the following beliefs: We believe the Bible (the 66 booksof the Old and New Testaments) isthe Word of God, written. As a“God-breathed” revelation, it is thusverbally inspired and completelywithout error (historically, scientifi-cally, morally, and spiritually) in itsoriginal writings. While God theHoly Spirit supernaturally superin-tended the writing of the Bible, thatwriting nevertheless reflects thewords and literary styles of its indi-vidual human authors. Scripturereveals the being, nature, and char-acter of God, the nature of God’screation, and especially His will forthe salvation of human beingsthrough Jesus Christ. The Bible istherefore our supreme and finalauthority in all matters that itaddresses.

We believe that the physicaluniverse, the realm of nature, is thevisible creation of God. It declaresGod’s existence and gives a trust-worthy revelation of God’s charac-ter and purpose. In Scripture, Goddeclares that through His creationall humanity recognizes His exis-

tence, power, glory, and wisdom.An honest study of nature—itsphysical, biological, and socialaspects—can prove useful in a per-son’s search for truth. Properlyunderstood, God’s Word (Scripture)and God’s world (nature), as tworevelations (one verbal, one physi-cal) from the same God, will nevercontradict each other. Copyright ©1995–1999 by Reasons To Believe<www.reasons.org/about/sof.html>

Other Helpful Websites

The Discovery InstituteDiscovery Institute’s mission is tomake a positive vision of the futurepractical. The Institute discoversand promotes ideas in the commonsense tradition of representativegovernment, the free market, andindividual liberty. Our mission ispromoted through books, reports,legislative testimony, articles, publicconferences and debates, plusmedia coverage and the Institute’sown publications and award-win-ning Internet website. Current pro-jects explore the fields of technolo-gy, science and culture, reform ofthe law, national defense, the envi-ronment and the economy, thefuture of democratic institutions,transportation, religion and publiclife, government entitlement spend-ing, foreign affairs, and cooperationwithin the binational region of“Cascadia.” The efforts of Discoveryfellows and staff, headquartered inSeattle, are crucially abetted by theInstitute’s members, board, andsponsors.<www.discovery.org>

BreakPointOne of Chuck Colson’s ministries,BreakPoint gives a Christian per-spective on today’s news andtrends. You can get past articles,some of which deal directly withthe issue of origins and theirimpact. <www.christianity.com/breakpoint>

The Access Research Network Access Research Network is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization dedi-cated to providing accessible infor-mation on science, technology, andsociety. We focus on such contro-versial topics as genetic engineer-ing, euthanasia, computer technol-ogy, environmental issues, cre-ation/evolution, fetal tissueresearch, AIDS, and so on. Throughour publications and product offers,we give you the information youneed to orient yourself in today’sscientific and technological worldand make informed decisions.

In our articles and publicationswe cover a host of issues—most ofthem controversial.<www.arn.org>

Intelligent Design NetworkIntelligent Design network, Inc., isa member-based nonprofit organi-zation. IDnet was organized in1999 in connection with thedebate over the Kansas ScienceEducation Standards. Their missionis to promote evidence-based sci-ence education with regard to theorigin of the universe and of lifeand its diversity. The IDnet seeks toenhance public awareness of theevidence of intelligent design in theuniverse and living systems.<www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org>

Origins.orgOrigins.org focuses primarily on thescientific theory known asIntelligent Design and reaches onelogical conclusion: that the universeand life show verifiable signs ofintelligent creation because there isan intelligent Creator. Some of ourresources deal with scientific dataexclusively, and some take thedefensible position that the datapoint to and support the biblicalclaim of divine creation. We let theresources speak on their own mer-its. <www.origins.org>

Christian College BiologyDepartment Websites

Taylor University “Biology DepartmentMission and Philosophy,” www.tayloru.eduupland/departments/biology/index.html

Geneva College www.geneva.edu/about_geneva/academic/undergraduate/biology/bio_christian_view.htmlEvangel Universitywww.evangel.edu/Academics/ScienceandTechnology/index.aspAsbury College www.asbury.edu/academics/biology/index.cfmDordt College www.dordt.edu/academics/departments/biology/program.shtmlPensacola Christian Collegewww.pcci.edu/UndergradInfo/AcademicInfo/BasicSciences_Engineering/biology.htmlWheaton Collegewww.wheaton.edu/homeBio.htmlCalvin College www.calvin.edu/academic/biology/mission.htmLiberty University www.liberty.edu/academics/artsci/biochem/about.htmlTrinity Western Universitywww.twu.ca/Academics/Biology/Overview.aspGrove City College www.gcc.edu/curr/cur_enter.htm

Hillsdale College www.hillsdale.edu/academics/bio/BiologyClade.htmlSeattle Pacific Universitywww.spu.edu/depts/biology/

$CSE_Quark_22.qxd 11/23/2001 1:02 PM Page 17