Written by Jenny Retzlaff
I love teaching physics! I love sharing the incredible order in God’s creation, the laws that govern the universe, and the amazing discoveries and innovations that come from the study of this gift. I absolutely love it! However, there was one topic that left me more anxious than excited: creation apologetics.
When the opportunity to take Creation Apologetics 101 presented itself, I saw an opportunity to grow in my knowledge to better equip my students. It changed my perspective on teaching creation apologetics and helped calm my fears. Here are three of the many ways in which it changed my outlook.
The Use of Reason
Because I did not want to exalt my reason above the absolute truths found in God’s Word, I was hesitant to discuss the use of reason in creation apologetics.
Mark Bergemann in The Narrow Lutheran Middle Road for Creation describes the narrow road Christians must follow when using reason. On either side of this narrow road are two ditches:
- Ditch #1 sees arguments from reason as able to create faith in a biblical creation. This ditch dangerously leaves out the work of the Holy Spirit. It is by faith alone our students believe in God’s creation.
- Ditch #2 avoids all use of arguments from reason in defending biblical creation. This ditch leaves our students without the opportunity to use reason to create seeds of doubt or to create a point of contact with evolutionists. Our students also miss the opportunity to use reason to more deeply understand the truths of creation.
Before this class, I was in Ditch #2. Studying how Jesus used reason to quiet the attacks of the Pharisees gave me confidence that reason need not be avoided. Jesus justified healing a man’s shriveled hand on the Sabbath using reason (Matthew 12:9-14). He justified casting demons out of a woman on the Sabbath using reason (Luke 13:15-16).
Of course, our perfect Savior always used reason appropriately. I will caution my students to use reason with careful discretion. Reason is never to be used as a means to sustain or create faith. Reason can, however, be used to connect what we see in the world with what we learn as absolute truth in God’s Word. Reason can be a useful tool for our students in silencing unbelievers, providing a point of contact, or planting a seed of doubt. Since diversity exists amongst evolutionary teaching, reason can also be useful in discerning the proper strategy to discuss the topic.
The Importance of Properly Defining Science and Evolution in Terms of Science
One of the benefits of this class is that it made me more intentional in teaching how bias can lead scientists to false conclusions. I want my students to analyze the viewpoint (bias) of evolution, with its corresponding assumptions and false conclusions, so they can recognize when this bias presents itself outside of the examples I share.
While I understand an evolutionist’s bias leads to false conclusions, I feel it is important for my students to understand evolution is scientific. Evolutionary scientists collect data, evaluate data, and draw conclusions. The problem lies in the bias: believing there is no god or placing creation on the same timeline as the evolution of things today. With either of these biases, millions of years are needed to carry out the process of evolution. Evolutionists are using their own logical reasoning to make their conclusion match their assumptions without true evidence. Throughout the school year, I will look for opportunities to point out the obvious and subtle ways in which this bias skews the evolutionist’s conclusions.
Dangers of Believing Evolution
I feel I have done my students a disservice in the past by just talking about evolution as a denial of creation, which threatens our faith. This may sound well and good until one delves deeper. It is critical to identify the evolutionist’s foundation of the origin of man and the universe: no god. No god leads to denying law and gospel. Denying law and gospel means no need for a Savior. One cannot deny god and find salvation in Jesus as their Savior.
Ultimately, I want my students to see that addressing evolution starts with addressing a person’s faith. Without faith, an evolutionist will never truly believe in a biblical creation. Teaching creation apologetics is not about winning the creation vs. evolution argument but providing an opportunity to share the gospel and allow the Holy Spirit to change hearts for eternal salvation.
Jenny Retzlaff (DMLC ’94) is serving as a physics and engineering teacher at Fox Valley LHS.
References
Bergemann, M. (2016, Summer). The Narrow Middle Road for Creation. Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly. 113(3), 163-174.
Bergemann, M. (2017, Fall). Assumption of Evolutionists. LSI Journal. 31(4), 7-16.
Reuschel, T. M. (2016, Fall). God or No God? Creation or Evolution? LSI Journal. 30(4), 6-24.
Steven, R. W. (2016, Winter). Code Systems Evidence a Creator and Declare the Glory of God. LSI Journal. 30(1), 7-12.
Jenny,
Judging from the number of comments, your article is being well received. I know I found it to be stimulating. You are a very good writer. I was left wanting more.
I have one thought that should not be taken as a criticism of the article, but rather as an extension to the discussion. In today’s world, every Christian needs to become better informed about the need to defend the faith. But Christian apologetics alone can be a real turn-off to the same people we are trying to reach out to with the gospel. If my church were to offer a course in apologetics to its members, it would be my hope that the church’s leaders would also make available a course about Christian compassion. Our interaction with unbelievers needs to be a balance of both our zeal for the truth and our Christ-like love for all people, including those whose convictions do not agree with ours. In the end, actions will always speak louder than words.
Thanks for the article.
Jenny, thank you for a good summary of our Creation Apologetics 101 continuing education online class.
Blog readers may be interested in reviewing a few of the texts discussed in class. The opening text mentioned by Jenny is “The Narrow Lutheran Middle Road for Creation.” While the WLQ version is used in class, those without a copy of the WLQ can read a shorter version previously published in the spring 2016 LSI Journal at http://www.LutheranScience.org/2016spring. The closing text mentioned by Jenny is “Assumptions of Evolutionists,” available in the fall 2017 LSI Journal at http://www.LutheranScience.org/2017fall.
Look over these articles and see if you would like to join the discussion by taking the 1-credit Moodle course, Creation Apologetics 101. Registration is open for the next session, which is June 25 to July 27, 2018.
The “assumptions” article ends with these words: “Pointing out the assumptions of evolutionists is a powerful tool in your creation apologetics toolbox. Make good use of this tool. Start with the ‘no creator’ assumption. If needed, also mention the ‘no flood,’ ‘deep time,’ and other assumptions. Instead of questioning the science of evolution, question the unproven assumptions which direct and constrain that science.”
Mark Bergemann, adjunct instructor, Creation Apologetics 101 and 102.
Ben, thanks so much for adding this very important point; I couldn’t agree more. And I thank you for using the word “urgent”. When the Christian faith is under the increasingly aggressive attacks that prevail more and more today, all of us need to recognize the urgency involved, and speak up readily (I Peter 3:15) with a clear, direct, well-informed yet still loving voice at every opportunity that presents itself.
Ben, comments are not posted to the blog when submitted. All comments are first reviewed before they are posted to the blog. This prevents roving internet programs from posting indecent links. Thanks for understanding why there is a delay.
Hmm, first comment didn’t take. Let’s try again.
Jonathan, I think you’ve got good points. I’d like to add that another use of apologetics is to create a “cultural milieu” that “allows” Christianity, in the words of Dr. William Lane Craig. What he’s referring to here is that apologetics can, if well done, help us overcome the brain-dead, anti-intellectual caricature that Christians are sometimes portrayed as by certain sources. By learning the science and apologetics, we can show that we understand and know the science, but have reasons to believe the way we do. This lets people know you can be intelligent and a Christian – they’re not mutually exclusive.
The danger in not knowing these types of apologetics is that as those “Christianity-as-anti-intellectual” voices grow louder, our faith may get pushed farther to the “fringe”, possibly causing more people to reject us out of hand, since they don’t want to be seen as stupid or otherwise unintelligent. Of course, like you said, Jonathan, faith cannot be created by apologetics. However, by maintaining or growing the idea that Christians can be smart, too, this can help keep people at least receptive to the idea listening to us, and thus give us more opportunities to spread the life-giving Gospel.
This is a really important discussion, and something that seems a bit urgent, but unfortunately, I don’t know if it always falls on receptive ears. I am a fan of William Lane Craig, and he also says that Christianity has a “smart person” problem, and Christians are often portrayed as unintelligent. What can we do to combat this problem?
Nice points, Jonathan. One other benefit of apologetics is to help maintain a “cultural milieu” that “allows” our Christian faith, to use the words of Dr. William Lane Craig. Using apologetics and having this knowledge can help Christians be seen as intelligent people who know and understand the science, and have reasons for believing the way we do. This shows that we’re not the brain dead caricatures that some modern sources paint us as.
On the other hand, if Christianity becomes too “fringe” or is seen as having no intellectual adherents, it can get pushed farther away from the mainstream. This may cause an increase in the number of people who may reject us and our beliefs out of hand, hampering our ability to spread the Gospel. Like you said, Jonathan, it’s not apologetics that create faith, it’s the Word; therefore, it’s important for us to create/maintain an environment that lets us reach as many people as possible with that saving Word.
It is very encouraging to hear of advocacy for increased use of apologetics. As far as the “two ditches” referred to, can it be summarized this way: 1) we dare not view or attempt to use apologetics as an alternate Means of Grace, as if the Holy Spirit cannot create faith apart from our input. However, 2) certainly this same Holy Spirit expects us to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3) by also using tools from mankind that He makes available to us to help defend the faith (the definition of apologetics) for those in whom it already exists, and to remove obstacles to the faith for those in whom faith is blocked by these obstacles.
Nice work Jenny. As a teacher of Biology and Physics, your thoughts on presenting evolution in the light of God’s Word is well said.
I have my Biology student read Cyril Spaude’s paper entitled, “The Doctrinal Conclusions of Evolution. One of my goals is to get students thinking about evolution and man’s reason and when they are in conflict with each other.
Thank you for your writing on this topic. I would enjoy sharing thought on how we teach our respective science class.
God bless your work.
Perry Lund
Evergreen Lutheran
Jenny: This was well done! I appreciated your use of Scripture, your proper division and application of God’s Word and your concern about the correct utilization of reason in your lesson. I also am pleased with your ultimate purpose of sharing the Gospel in order to “allow the Holy Spirit to change hearts for eternal salvation.” Thank you for your diligent work in behalf of God’s children.