The question of "intelligent design" -- a scientific theory which states a complex and detailed universe must have had a designer, though not explicitly saying who that designer is - has caused heated debate in public (or, government-run) schools across t
The question of “intelligent design”—a scientific theory which states a complex and detailed universe must have had a designer, though not explicitly saying who that designer is - has caused heated debate in public (or, government-run) schools across the United States of America. Currently, a U.S. federal district court in Pennsylvania is hearing a lawsuit on the subject.
At issue is whether or not even a mention of an alternative to Darwinian evolution—a theory taught in almost every American public school—should be made. Parents of 11 students are suing the Dover, Pennsylvania school board because it requires high school biology teachers to tell students Darwin’s theory has unexplained “gaps” and intelligent design should be considered as a possibility, according to a United Press International report.
Seventh-day Adventists have long stood for a literal, six-day creation, culminating in the seventh day’s rest, known as the Sabbath, as recorded in Genesis chapter 2, verses 2 and 3. Such a belief is taught in Adventist-owned schools, which are private, and was affirmed by scientists and theologians who attended a series of church-sponsored “Faith and Science” conferences, which led to a report on the subject in October 2004 (see ANN, Oct. 13, 2004).
Dr. L. James Gibson, director of the church’s Geoscience Research Institute in Loma Linda, California, says that while he’s not in favor of judges determining school curricula, the focus in classrooms needs to shift away from theories and toward that which can be demonstrated.
“Science is an exciting activity,” Gibson told ANN in a recent interview. “The process of testing hypotheses, discovery, and there’s so much good material that deals with experimental science, that a course [on origins] could be shaped” around those things.
“The idea that there could be a ‘designer’ is a perfectly legitimate idea,” Gibson added. “Darwinianism has its shortcomings and it would seem the [scientific] establishment is reluctant to discuss them.”
At the same time, Gibson said there should be a “distinction between testable scientific ideas, and those which are historical and not really accountable to experimentation. We would be wise to use ‘multiple working hypotheses’ in studying origins.”
Today, he contends, many teachers push evolutionary theory as dogma, telling students they are “accepting [it] on the authority” of teachers and scientists of years gone by.
But, Gibson adds, “the experts aren’t always right; they have added their own philosophy.”
What students should be taught, he said, is how to learn and discover for themselves.
“Science was founded by people who believed in a designer,” Gibson contends. “[Sir Isaac] Newton wrote more about the Bible than he did on the subject of physics.”
An Adventist attorney who works with America’s leadership, James Standish of the church’s Public Affairs and Religious Liberty department, cautions that the state-run classroom isn’t the place for indoctrination.
“It would be wrong for public schools to teach creation—or even intelligent design—as ‘truth,’” Standish said. “But it’s equally wrong to teach evolution as truth. Rather public schools should discuss the evidence of origins and explain there are multiple theories.”
According to media reports, the trial may last another week or so. No word has been given on when a ruling would be handed down by the court.
