While looking at the website of Bob Jones University…I came across this on the Biology Department’s home page.
Science, as understood by the public, is largely infiltrated and controlled by the godless ideology of evolutionism…
Bob Jones University offers a major in biology on a firm philosophical basis that combines scientific excellence with an emphasis on the Biblical account of creation.
Now I realize Bob Jones university is ultraconservative, but is this approach common in faith based institutions? Would Baylor, or Notre Dame have anything similar? I couldn’t find much on the web. On BYU’s page, they don’t condemn evolution explicitly - but any mention of it was absent from these course descriptions. http://ar.byu.edu/catalog/undergrad_cat/2000/departments/Biology.html
Yet I imagine that in a ‘secular’ university, whole courses may be devoted to evolution. I am not a scientist myself, so my knowledge of biology is limited. But I have a difficult time understanding how biology could be taught in a place where evolution is considered not only false but dangerous thinking. And how would they explain dinosaurs, or *Australopithecus Africanus * fossils?
Would a biology, or paleontology degree, from a conservative Christian university be suspect in the eyes of the scientific community?
Only a few of the colleges and universities commonly considered as Christian have any problems with teaching science. While Bob Jones clearly has an issue, schools like Notre Dame, Holy Cross, etc don’t see science conflicting with Christianity any more than most Christian scientists do.
I think you are misinformed when you think that Christian implies a conflict with science.
Good think I previewed, I see you have refined your question and my point is moot. I haven’t looked at all the fundementalist universities, but I suspect there is some fancy footwork going on.
My sister went to a christian school and my Dad just could not believe some of the stuff they tried to shovel. Her science class was a joke. They put her in the school jsut because the schools here are not safe. They were dangerous when I graduated five years ago and apparently they are worse now. She’s out of the clutches of christianity now though.
I agree, but religious freedoms and all that rot. If I went and shut down their schools, then they’d be able to take away my right of free speech. And well, if they did that how could I carry a picket saying they are full of shit?
IANAXian, but would think that a responsible Xian education institution would at least offer a student the alternatives of evolution vs creation, and let the student decide for themselves in that context.
Do they even teach paleontology? Judging from the websites, this is not the case.
As for biology: evolution is only a small part of the entire course. I guess the overall worth of the degree is no less than one from an otherwise equivalent University. The only time the degree would be suspect is if someone with said degree writes a paper on a subject related to evolution. I asume this paper would not be published in any of the mainstream journals.
I fully agree with you on this point, but a faculty willing to expose its students to such challenging ideas would not be fundamentalist by its very nature. I certainly don’t expect to see anything like this happen in this century.
The word evolution shows up only in the course description for BIO 421 Evolutionary Theory (3). The description is
.
IANAB (Biologist), however, in their general education courses they discussed various philosophies dispationately enough that many colleagues had difficulty retaining the belief that Christianity is viable. I rather suspect that inasmuch as they discuss, they will try to give it as fair a shake as possible within their context.
Like I said, IANAB, so I can’t comment if they give Evolution enough time.
As a Christian, I find this sort of thread really sad.
When did we Christians turn into a bunch of arrogant, isolationist, anti-scientific pricks?
I can’t figure out if most of us really are pricks or if it’s just the vocal minority who make us look that way. I really hope it’s the latter, but then that just means the rest of us let the pricks hog the spotlight. Not very flattering either way.
Here’s how a Christian should behave:
With humility, always respecting others and their beliefs.
With love and kindness toward all, even enemies.
Desiring to know TRUTH above all, and always speaking the truth in love.
Most of these things are near-quotes from Jesus … who most Christians claim to try to be like. If you see a Christian who isn’t doing these things – or at least trying – you have permission to question whether they really a Christian.
An interesting parallel to the question of whether a conservative Christian institution can confer degrees that are scientifically respectable arises in seminaries, believe it or not.
Virtually all elite universities offering PhD’s in hermeneutics/ancient languages/biblical literature are more-or-less explicitly secular in their approach to scripture. In order to get their MDiv grads into the bigtime programs, therefore, conservative seminaries must at least ensure that their students are fluent in – if not necessarily in agreement with – the history and practice of grammatico-critical exegesis, etc. It seems to work out ok for the seminary students.
And judging from the level of success that many Christian universities have in placing pre-med students, I imagine it works ok for the science folks as well.
Thankfully, the things that BJU has come to represent are not indicative of the approach most Christians take to the pursuit of Truth.
I took an paleontology class at BYU in 1990. The professor at the start of the first class explained that he would be teaching according to understood scientific priciples. He explained that this would at points disagree with LDS doctrine, but everyone would be graded on the material in the class. The students were allowed to believe whatever they wanted, but use of young Earth etc. arguements would earn a failing grade within that class. This was the only time the subject came up.
So not all Religious Universities stick to doctrine over scientific theory.
yo, bartman! what the hell kind of message does that send to the students? was this instructor’s methods and attitudes understood by the administration? seems to me they must disregard what they have been told is “correct (true?)” in order to pass the class! i dont get it! (brain siezing up, smoke coming out ears) sorry, cant type fast enough to keep up with train of thought.
my only experiance with this dilemma was when i lived with a lady and her 10 yr old son. i used to help him with his homework (went to god school). i cound not be a party to the crap this school was foisting on this poor kid and calling it “science”. he was a pretty smart kid and had questions that could not be explained without “blowing the bible angle” and i felt compelled to give it to him straight. (we watched alot of “nova” when his mom was at work, turned him onto Unca Cecil and “The Straight Dope”). led to a few problems in the house. i eventually moved on and found a partner with whom i share more in common, he grew up and is a fine young man and his mom is doing fine also (except for those damn firestone tires)
I am not suggesting that Christians are arrogant isolationalist ‘pricks’ (Spamagnet, does your pastor know you used that word?). My point is how do conservative Christian institutions reconcile ‘science’ and ‘faith’? A person can be absolutely brilliant and be a Christian who hold creationist views.
…I now realize my thread title is very very broad, so I should say 'Can a fundamentalist university teach science effectively?"…
Yeah, THAT title isn’t offensive.
Speaking as a christian, I am offended by the statement that, because of some disagreements between the xian/secular scientific communities, christians are totally unqualified to teach any science at all.
Unless i’m misunderstanding. If so, set me straight.
Dave: If you think this should happen, then secular schools should also teach both viewpoints. (I personally think that it should be this was in secular schools, evolution having many holes. [no it doesn’t! he’s a witch! burn him!]
I would have to disagree. For my Bachelor’s, I was not only required to take an upper-division evolutionary biology course, but every other course I took in the field was either taught from an evolutionary perspective or depended on competent knowledge and understanding of evolutionary theory. This includes invert. zoology, biochemistry, biological oceanography, population ecology, and so on ad infinitum.
For my Master’s, I was again required to take an evolutionary biology class (graduate level), and it was also one of the fields we all had to take qualifying exams in.
As Dobzhansky once said: “nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”
I would suspect a biology degree from a university that didn’t teach evolution. (Of course, first I would have to know that it didn’t, which might not become apparent immediately.)
I should also mention that, after looking at the website for Bob Jones U., I have no idea how I could teach some of the courses they offer without reference to evolution. I’m sure there’s some way to do it, but it wouldn’t make any sense to me. I doubt that it would make a lot of sense to most other biologists either.
That’s not too strange. After all, if you were taking a course on Shakespeare, and you discussed what happened to MacBeth IRL instead of what happened in the play, it would be understandable for you to get a poor grade.