WELS Schools Must Teach Evolution

by Mark Bergemann

Evolution with its billions of years is a lie that has shipwrecked the faith of many. Why must we teach it? To prepare our students for a life in today’s world. Specifically:

  1. To blunt the temptation of evolution for students.
  2. To aid students as they minister to other Christians tempted by evolution.
  3. To give students a pre-evangelism resource for leading certain people to listen to the gospel message (Bergemann, 2015).

Our WELS students are inundated with the teaching of billions of years (through social media, news media, TV, magazines, advertising, and especially from non-WELS friends). Our WELS students encounter secular evolution teaching everywhere. The constant 24/7 message is that there is no creator god.

A basic understanding of evolution is expected of today’s students. By teaching the basics of evolution, we can include the assumptions of evolution (no miracles, no flood, billions of years, and no god), mention a few of the many scientific problems evolution faces, and show from Scripture how the evolution story is completely incompatible with the Christian faith. A small start at meeting this goal is a 25 minute confirmation class video available free at www.LutheranScience.org/video.

MLC professor emeritus Martin Sponholz (1999) strongly advocated teaching evolution to our students:

Shall our children, those that our Lord sent to us through His church, sent to us by their parents, be given lessons in science so separate from the main stream of worldly science that they do not know evolution or the commonly accepted systems of scientific thought when they get to the university? . . . I believe the best way for a Christian teacher to deal with evolution is to teach it right out front, plainly, to the youngest child that can understand the difference between man’s word and God’s Word. . . . We should teach evolution with its strengths. . . . We should teach evolution with its weaknesses. . . . We should teach evolution with its out-and-out false doctrines bringing the child of God face-to-face with the world that does not desire, much less love their Savior Jesus. In this way we as teachers may use any textbook the world might produce. Knowing such a book contains much that is false, we as teachers will develop fresh testimony straight from our hearts, write extra lessons showing God’s Word in authority over man’s wisdom, and leave the child to ponder in amazement even as Christ’s disciples, ‘Even the wind and the sea obey Him.’ When a teacher must explain some aspect of science as error before the Word, science will be taught as it is, as human attempts to explain. (p. 1-3)

In addition to teaching evolution, we should also address the ways that historical accounts in Scripture (like creation and the flood) are attacked in today’s world. When we teach the creation account, do we explain the difference between biblical “kinds” and the modern term “species”?  In teaching the fall into sin, do we mention that death is the penalty for sin, not the means God used to create? When we teach the flood, do we point out that the ark appears to have been several times larger than needed to house all known kinds of land animals (both living and extinct, including dinosaurs)? When we teach science, do we explain how science is often wrong and how its theories and laws are regularly replaced with new theories and laws (Lutze, 2014)? Such arguments from reason serve to blunt the temptation of evolution.

There is a narrow Lutheran middle regarding teaching creation. Let’s walk that narrow path while not falling into the ditches on either side. The ditch on one side incorrectly sees arguments from reason as able to aid in creating or sustaining faith. The ditch on the other side incorrectly sees no place at all for arguments from reason in our apologetic. Let us guide our students down this narrow Lutheran path.

Mark Bergemann serves as president of the WELS affiliated Lutheran Science Institute and as Evangelism Board chairman at Good Shepherd-West Allis WI. Mark is a retired electrical engineer and holds a BS from UW Milwaukee.

References
Bergemann, M., (April-June, 2015) Witnessing in a world where evolution claims ‘there is no God’ part 1: Why confront evolution in your witness?” LSI Journal. pp. 9-13.  http://lutheranscience.org/free  (accessed Aug 20, 2015).

Bergemann, M. (April-June, 2013) The place of reason in defending the Christian faith. LSI Journal. pp. 11-15.  http://lutheranscience.org/apologetics  (accessed Aug 20, 2015).

Lutze, P. E., (2014) Science and the Bible in WELS elementary schools – part 1. Issues in Lutheran Education.   http://blogs.mlc-wels.edu/wels-educator/2014/11/17/science-and-the-bible-in-wels-elementary-schools/ (accessed Aug 20, 2015).

Sponholz, M. P., (1999) Teaching and unteaching evolution: The fossils say nothing. Workshop Paper, pp. 1-3.    http://lutheranscience.org/home/180015283/180015283/
180153907/FossilsSay%20Nothing.pdf
   (accessed Aug 20, 2015).

 

16 thoughts on “WELS Schools Must Teach Evolution

  1. “But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.”

    That’s right … there is nothing new under the sun. In other words, whatever form the evolution mentality was popular in times past, Jesus knew about it and not once ever embraced it no matter how popular among the intellectuals.
    (see Mark’s reply September 1, 2015 at 11:01 pm )

    Yet, despite the obvious, the salt of the earth finds losing it saltiness necessary.
    Call me narrow minded \ out of touch … but “I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked.”

  2. The point that Mark is making is that we must teach evolution in our schools. So true. Martin Sponholz has also made this point as Mark says.

    A challenge in this is that we also need to teach the nature of doing science and reasoning. A theory is an encompassing idea that explains and predicts. Theories in science are not ever proven true. As has been said, theories are accepted by scientists AS IF they are true because they have not been falsified in many investigations. Normal science is about fitting things into the dominant theory. If something in an investigation does raise serious questions about a theory, Thomas Kuhn, has pointed out that there has to be an attractive alternative theory available for people to be able to change to a new way of thinking. Even so, it also helps if the scientists who were trained in the original way of looking at things literally die off and younger scientists who are excited by the new theory take over. I am reminded of Priestley who discovered oxygen and that it was involved in combustion but still he could not stop believing in the phlogiston theory of burning. When Harvard was founded, the phlogiston theory was still defended and demonstrated to the students.

    In the case of macroevolution, there are certainly problems, but there is not likely to be a switch to another paradigm unless there would be an alternative theory. Ah, yes, how about switching to Creation? The trouble is that Creation involves accepting that there is Designer, a Creator. That would go against the assumption in modern science of philosophical naturalism which many, not all, believe. Philosophical naturalism holds that there are ONLY natural causes. If you believes in philosophical naturalism, you are automatically committed to coming up with a framework of our origin using only natural causes.

    Science is self-limited to methodological naturalism. That is, when one works in science, one only studies natural causes and effects. This operational, practical naturalism doesn’t rule out anything supernatural; it merely stops at consideration of things beyond nature and rightly leaves the rest to theology. The trouble is that some have moved to a philosophical naturalism. Accordingly, the Big Bang theory bothers many in science because it raises the question of a cause before there was nature. What caused the Big Bang cannot be natural?

    Back to evolution, one problem in macroevolution is that there are gaps in the fossil record. Everyone recognizes the lack of transitional fossils that show change from one type to another. The facts do not speak for themselves. The fossils say nothing, but one can see that the existing data can be fit with the creation of separate kinds. So is the theory of macroevolution falsified?

    Many scientists, the conservatives, just look harder for more fossils to fill the gaps. they trust that with time the gaps will be filled.

    On the other hand, Stephen Jay Gould, a professor at Harvard until he passed away, said the gaps will never be filled. Believing in macroevolution as the only logical way of looking at things, he and Niles Eldredge, offered the idea that the changes can move very fast and that then the transitional forms are not around very long, reducing their chances of becoming fossils. Hence, the gaps exist.

    See how the facts can be fit into different explanations. So there is modification but not overthrow of macroevolution for those who wish it. We need to point out for our students is that assumptions affect our conclusions. If one assumes that there are ONLY natural causes, one rules out consideration of God at the very beginning of one’s reasoning. Assumptions are not proven. Plus, we do have to make assumptions when we think, but it helps if we stay aware of them and evaluate them. The teaching of the power of assumptions is something that we can and must teach with simple examples in our schools.

  3. I’ve heard the Micro/Macro thing before, but in dialoguing with someone on the evolutionary side of things, they seemed very confused by that terminology. I don’t think it is something they are familiar with. Is this something used in modern textbooks?

  4. I clicked on this article because I completely agree with what they are supporting, however I am greatly disappointed.This article leaves out a major point in the argument as to why WELS schools need to teach evolution. There are two types of evolution: micro and macro. Microevolution is small changes are small changes in species that happen in natural ways. This does not teach that whole new species are created, they just change. Whereas macroevolution teaches that new species can be created. It saddens me that the WELS will reject the entire idea of evolution when we disagree with a very small portion and the portion that scientists have the greatest hesitations about. We need to educate ourselves in the difference between the two so we do not just reject ideas because a small part of it doesn’t agree with what we teach as a synod. I am WELS and I can proudly say that I believe in Microevolution.

    • It seems we agree. Natural selection does indeed produce new species within a biblical kind. I have not encountered anyone in the WELS who rejects this, although some are confused about terms such as “species” and “kinds.”

      My post references a video at http://www.LutheranScience.org/video which states, “God created animals with the ability to have offspring that are bigger or smaller, with longer or shorter hair, and with other changes. Each kind of animal can develop large variations due to natural selection. Lions, cheetahs, and house cats are very different, but they may be of the same biblical kind. The dozens of species of cats alive today may have descended from one or two pairs of cats on Noah’s Ark. Many cats can interbreed, including lions and tigers. It is so easy to see that cats may be of the same kind, that some four-year-old children will call all these various cats ‘kitty.’ No new kinds of animals ever develop, but some kinds, like the dinosaurs, have gone extinct.”

      You write, “It saddens me that the WELS will reject the entire idea of evolution when we disagree with a very small portion and the portion that scientists have the greatest hesitations about.” While evolution is a mixture of reality and fabrication, the very heart of evolution is the claim that there is no creator god. Evolution attacks the need for a Savior by placing death as the means to create instead of as the penalty for sin. This is carefully explained in the video referenced above.

  5. A really good resource for WELS teachers considering this is Dr. Kent Hound and his Creation Seminar. Check him out at DrDino.com!

  6. > the assumptions of evolution (no miracles, no flood, billions of years, and no god),

    These aren’t assumptions. They are all proven facts. And BTW: Ziusudra -> Atrahasis -> Gilgamesh -> Noah

    > mention a few of the many scientific problems evolution faces

    There are none. Despite millions of opportunities to be proven wrong, evolution has proven itself true every single time with no exceptions.

    > and show from Scripture how the evolution story is completely incompatible with the Christian faith.

    Wrong. The Jewish stories are challenged by reality, something which only bothers a lunatic fringe of Jews, if those. Christianity makes no statements in the NT which have any bearing on evolution whatsoever.

    • Creation and Noah’s Flood are taught as true history throughout Scripture, including the NT. Jesus and the Apostles spoke about Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Enoch, Noah, the flood, Eden, creation, the fall into sin, and the curse, as real people and true events.

      Matthew 19:3-6 Jesus defends marriage by referring to creation.
      Matthew 19:28 Jesus refers to the restoration of all things to their original perfection.
      Matthew 23:34-35 Jesus refers to the blood of righteous Abel which was shed.
      Matthew 24:36-39 Jesus refers to Noah, the ark, and how the flood swept away people.
      Mark 10:6-9 Jesus defends marriage by referring to creation.
      Luke 3:23-38 The genealogy of Jesus includes Noah, Methuselah, Enoch, Seth, and
      Adam.
      Luke 11:50-51 Jesus refers to the blood of the prophet Able being shed.
      Luke 17:26-27 Jesus refers to Noah, the ark, and how the flood swept away people.
      Acts 3:17-21 Peter refers to the restoration of all things to their original perfection.
      Romans 5:12-21 Death came to all men through the sin of Adam.
      1 Corinthians 11:8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;
      20
      1 Corinthians 11:12 For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman.
      1 Corinthians 15:20-22 Death came through a man. In Adam all die.
      1 Corinthians 15:42-49 Adam, the first man, was of the dust of the earth.
      2 Corinthians 11:3 Eve was deceived by the serpent.
      1 Timothy 2:13-14 Adam was formed first, then Eve. Eve was first to be deceived.
      Hebrews 11:4 Cain’s and Abel’s sacrifices.
      Hebrews 11:5 Faithful Enoch was taken away by God and did not experience death.
      Hebrews 11:7 Noah condemned the world, built an ark, and saved his family.
      Hebrews 12:24 The blood of Jesus speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.
      1 Peter 3:20 In the days of Noah, an ark was built which saved 8 people.
      2 Peter 2:5 God destroyed the ungodly with a flood but saved Noah and 7 others.
      2 Peter 3:3-6 The earth was formed from water and the world was once destroyed
      by water.
      1 John 3:12 Evil Cain murdered his righteous brother Abel.
      Jude 11 Godless men have taken the way of Cain.
      Jude 14 Enoch, the seventh from Adam, was a prophet.
      Revelation 22:3 In heaven there will no longer be any curse.

    • >>Despite millions of opportunities to be proven wrong, evolution has proven itself true every single time with no exceptions.

      Then why is evolution still only a theory?

      • We creationists often comment that evolution is ONLY a theory. This is something our WELS schools should address as we teach science and teach about evolution. The following is from part two of a paper referenced in this blog, Witnessing in a World Where Evolution Claims “There is No God.” http://lutheranscience.org/free

        “Never Make These Arguments:
        Some creationists incorrectly claim, “Evolution is ONLY a theory; it is not proven.” This shows that they know little about scientific terms. In science, the term “theory” denotes an explanation which is well accepted by the scientific community. “Theory” is an end stage in science. Theories never become “facts” as additional evidence is found. Scientific theories and laws are never proven with certainty. Any theory or law may be discarded and replaced tomorrow.
        Some creationists incorrectly claim, “God created each species, and no new species ever develop.” The modern term “species” is not the same as the biblical term “kind.” Most biblical “kinds” of creatures include many different species. No new biblical kind will ever develop, but new species do develop within those kinds. All of our present day species of land creatures would not have been able to fit into Noah’s ark, but all the Biblical kinds – including the dinosaur kinds – would easily have fit.”

        • I think you are proving your point to me (which I am thankful for). Not just our schools but I myself need to study more about evolution and its scientific terms. It would be helpful if I am to discuss creation/evolution with anyone. And if I sound like I don’t know what I am talking about, why would anyone on the other side listen to me? I need to be like Paul and hang out more in the “Areopagus” to learn more about them.

      • I would also question a 100% accuracy claim as is made to wonder who and where these proofs have shown themselves to be true every single time with no exceptions. Really???!!!

Please, share YOUR thoughts!