Liberty University disputing evolution

Liberty University disputing evolution

Jill Nance photo

Professor of biology David DeWitt holds a fossil while explaining evolutionists’ views during a biology class.

» 152 Comments | Post a Comment

On a recent Tuesday, a dozen or so Liberty University students are in the midst of a lecture in one of their required courses, creation studies.

This is an advanced section of the course, and many of the students are biology majors. Neuroscientist David DeWitt, their professor, leads a lecture on natural selection.

He draws on an example from the documentary film “March of the Penguins” that shows female penguins journeying to find food, and then a seal singling out one to attack.

“Which penguin gets eaten?” he asks. “The one that’s genetically inferior, or the one that’s in the wrong place at the wrong time?”

That element of chance, he argues, begins to unravel the idea of natural selection, or “survival of the fittest,” a key mechanism in the theory of evolution.

At the front of the class, a slide on DeWitt’s presentation displays a biblical passage from Ecclesiastes 9:11.

“I have seen something else under the sun,” it states. “The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong; nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.”


With a half-dozen colleges locally, Lynchburg is well represented on both sides of the evolution vs. creation discussion.

But a three-day event starting today seeks to refute evolution and tip the scales in favor of creation.

Starting today, Liberty University’s neighbor and affiliate, Thomas Road Baptist Church, will host “Answers for Darwin.” Put together by Christian-defending ministry Answers in Genesis, the conference includes four speakers, two who are Liberty professors.

Many local events from the evolutionist perspective were hosted last week, coinciding with the Feb. 12 birthday of Charles Darwin.

- Lynchburg College hosted three lectures last week as part of “Evolution Weekend.”

- The biology department at Sweet Briar College also marked the event with birthday cake and prizes for students spotted wearing Darwin stickers.

- At Randolph College this Thursday, Feb. 19, four professors will give presentations in celebration of the life of Darwin. The event starts at 7:30 p.m. in the Martin Science building.

Here’s the lineup for “Answers for Darwin,” which is free and open to the public.

Today
- 6 to 7:20 p.m.: Ken Ham, “Answers from Genesis on Darwin and the Culture Wars”

- 7:40 to 8:40 p.m.: Dr. An-drew Snelling, “Answers from Geology — The Catastrophe of Noah’s Flood”

- 8:55 to 9:55 p.m.: Liberty Biology Professor Dr. David DeWitt, “Answers from Biology about Darwinian Evolution — Unraveling the Origins Controversy”

Monday
- 7 to 8:10 p.m.: Ken Ham, “Answers for Racism: Darwin and Evolution’s Racist Roots”

- 8:35 to 9:30 p.m.: Dr. Andrew Snelling, “Answers from Science and Scripture on the Real Age of the Earth”

Tuesday
- 7 to 8:10 p.m.: Ken Ham, “Answers for Effective Evangelism in the 21st Century”

- 8:30 to 9:30 p.m.: Liberty Geology Professor Dr. Marcus Ross, “Answers from the Fossil Record — Creation vs. Darwinian Evolution”

As universities everywhere this month mark the 200th anni-versary of Charles Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of his “Origin of Species,” which details his theory of evolution, Liberty University has a focus that is unabashedly different.

“At this university, we’re going to be celebrating creation,” announced Law School Dean Mathew Staver to a cheering crowd of students at a convocation service in early February.

Liberty is on the front lines in the battle of creationism vs. evolution. And it has a battalion of creationist lawyers, scientists and professors in dozens of areas who weave creationism into their coursework and teach students on how to refute the theory of evolution.

“One of the distinguishing fac-tors of Liberty is that every single student here takes a class called creationist studies,” said Campus Pastor Johnnie Moore. “It’s kind of at the core of our identity.”

Liberty leans toward young- Earth creationism, DeWitt said, which is a literal interpretation of the Bible that God created the heavens, Earth and all life in seven days, less than 10,000 years ago.

Creationism as a course of scientific study is shunned at many universities, where it is not recognized as a scientific explanation for the origin of life.

Biochemist Michael Behe, who recently spoke at Liberty as part of its counter-evolution events, readily acknowledged that minority view. A tenured professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, Behe told students that his colleagues vehemently disagree with his views on intel-ligent design, which states that life was designed by an “intelligent agent.”

At Lehigh University, his colleagues have posted a disclaimer on the department’s Web site.

It states that faculty members are “unequivocal in their support of evolutionary theory… It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific.”

Biologist Doug Shedd, a pro-fessor at Randolph College, said creationist views are not taught alongside evolution in his or most other college-level science classes.

“The scientific community in general thinks that there is no place for that,” he said. “The creationist views and views on intelligent design are views that people might be interested in exploring. But not inside science, because those views lay outside the realm of science.

“If science is about anything, it’s about testability. And creationism, at its heart, is untestable.”

Instead, he said, those ideas traditionally are pursued in course areas such as comparative religion, sociology or anthropology.

At Liberty, the science classroom is exactly where students learn about creation, and the content also is woven into many other areas of coursework.

The college is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools to award degrees in science programs including biology, biochemistry and molecular biology, nursing, psychology, engineering, health sciences and kinesiology.

DeWitt, who is director of the school’s center for creation stud-ies, teaches biology and two versions of creation studies — one for students in the sciences that includes more “scientifically detailed subject matter,” he said, and another that most students take, which does not.

He teaches both evolution and creation.

“I show them side-by-side — Here’s the human. Here’s the chimpanzee,” he said. “If I would not present evolution and their best evidence and arguments, then I would not be a scholar and I would not be providing the best service for the students.

“I actually teach more about evolution than I received in my undergraduate (biochemistry) program at Michigan State (Uni-versity). I also teach a lot more about creationism.”

DeWitt’s personal views are critical of evolution, he said.

“If a frog turns into a prince with a kiss then it’s a fairy tale. If a frog turns into a prince over millions of years, it’s science,” he said, referencing the theory of evolution. “It’s almost ridiculous.”

“I’m a scientist, and I’m not denigrating science. I’m critiqu-ing the idea that millions of years is the magic wand that makes it possible.”

Like many others, DeWitt said he once believed that evolution was guided by God.

But that view changed when he was in college.

“Molecules-to-man evolution is incompatible with the creationist account in the Bible,” he said.

Back in the classroom, he expanded on his example from “March of the Penguins.”

“Natural selection does operate on some level. The seals are going to be faster than the penguins, no matter what. There’s all these other factors that come into play,” such as learning, disease and luck, he said.

Randolph College’s Shedd said the scientific community at large is in agreement that evolution occurs.

“That, as far as I’m concerned, is a fact,” he said.

But whether natural selection is the sole mechanism that drives evolution, he said, is still under some debate.

“Sometimes, creationists can get somewhat obsessive about the fact that Darwin didn’t get everything right on the first try,” Shedd said. “And what scientist did?”

Staver said that the theory of evolution “has impacted everything,” including his area of expertise — law.

An evolutionary model for arguing cases, for example, now impacts the creation of law, he said.

Instead of the previously accepted practice of basing arguments on the original source, the U.S. Constitution, Staver said, now lawyers instead use case studies that build upon each other and “evolve” over time.

Law students at Liberty “have to understand both sides” in order to critically analyze cases, he said.

They also must learn the details of evolution versus creation “so they are comfortable and confident in advocating their position,” he said.

“You clearly see it in some of the more social areas such as marriage and abortion. But it really permeates all the areas of law.”

Moore said Liberty students, no matter which program they’re in, should understand arguments that support the creationist perspective so they can defend their beliefs.

“What we’re doing is, we’re training Christian young people to go into culture in various occupations; to be good Christians in their area of influence,” Moore said. “We want them to be as prepared to represent Christ and the Bible and Christian val-ues in culture as they are prepared to excel in their careers.

“And one key part of that is — Who is God? And Liberty believes God is creator.”

 

Advertisement

 
View More: lynchburg,liberty,
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by jbrown11 on February 22, 2009 at 8:40 pm

Ben Dover…...


Are you “certain” about your posts?  LOL

I had written a previous response and for some unknown reason my post was moderated and is not posted. Bummer.  I will try to quickly reconstruct…..

There is no doubt that we are impacted in our beliefs greatly by our parents, community and culture. But of course such beliefs are sacrosanct and are highly subject to change. I have worked with Christ believers who have paid dearly for rejecting past faith to believe in Christ.

As for the “need to believe”. I think that is inherent in man because God created man that way. In Genesis it says God created man because He was lonely. I believe He made us with a desire for relationship. Some have chosen to say no.

But I really wanted to ask you again if you would give me your theory about how original life in any form began.

Flag Comment Posted by snackychan16 on February 22, 2009 at 12:29 pm

I have always wondered how some biologists refute evolution. I mean, come on. The theory has been accepted for over 100 years. The evidence for evolution on a small scale is ample. Populations evolve. It is an observed fact.

The evidence for macroevolution is not concrete (unless you count organisms with short generation times), but also plentiful. Plus, there is really no distinction between the two, essentially. Molecular, embryological, structural homology. Transitional and intermediate forms. Biogeographics. Vestigial structures. Short-sided imperfections. These are all created by mutation and the change in frequency of alleles.

Every time DeWitt uses a model organism, he relies on the idea that evolution has created homology between species.

Which one of these is wrong:

1. Variation exists.
2. It is heritable.
3. There is a struggle for existence.
4. The individuals with the most beneficial variations survive and reproduce more.
5. Evolution occurs.

Pardis Sabeti can find positive selection in the human lineage.

Isn’t neuroscience hard? How can such an ignorant man accomplish so much? I can understand a difference between methodological and ontological science, but this man is actually teaching creationism.

See, here is evidence for natural selection: A man who does not really care about biology can teach it, just because he is smarter than a lot of the people who are philosophically scientists.

Flag Comment Posted by Rick on February 20, 2009 at 5:49 pm

Did any one else see the irony of Galileo and Darwin being featured in the same newspaper? (Sunday Feb 14)

  Darwin, like Galileo, just observed and reported what God did.

Even thought the Church didn’t like Galileo’s observations, the earth still orbits the sun.

Ecclesiasties 11:5 tells us that we can’t know the mind of God.
I belive God created Earth and Man, but I dont belive God has shared all the details,steps or reasons.

I also believe He only gives us what we can handle.  So far we have allowed Mr Darwins observations to divide acadamia from the church, resulting in removing prayer from school and God from science. Didnt handle that too well did we?

Just as we want better things for our children, so God wants us to grow and evolve. I hope we can handle it.

Flag Comment Posted by on February 20, 2009 at 4:23 pm

Has any one been follow the house floor debates.
Here is a good link for conversation.

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/doh/2009/02/jeff-frederick-vs-darwin.html

Flag Comment Posted by jbrown11 on February 20, 2009 at 2:31 pm

>>>>>>(J Brown)... ask me again and I’ll knock ya down.

  Who are you kidding with this… “Well, golly, where did all the matter come from?“

  Where did your God come from?


  There are two possibilities only.

1.  Nothing.

2 Everything.

  Now, do I have to explain how it turned out to you?<<<<<<


Oh man, there are so many fun things with a name like mine. Especially checking into a hotel.  LOL. Truth is my grandfather’s name was “John Smith”.

Ok, back to bidness….......

The belief in the claim of a “divine creator” with unlimited power is infinitely more believable than organic matter showing up as “poof” without any rhyme or reason. I would be curious to know your view from whence the beginning of any living organism showed up. Poof?

Flag Comment Posted by on February 20, 2009 at 2:04 pm

Ben if that was a minor stroke, let me experience it for the rest of my life on earth.
Of course with the knowledge that “they kill saints” I have decided I will not become a saint.

Flag Comment Posted by on February 20, 2009 at 1:53 pm

LynchburgRes of course right away I had to do a Google of “Shamanic experience”.
Certainly it may sound like that, but I do not believe in such cult type chants or using Hallucination drugs as discribed in Wiki and the Shaman site and the Shamantic experience site.

As you have written; that it would be exploited and chastised by the like of some people on this remarks section, I refrained from going deeper then I already have.
Should it ever happen to those who chastise/hypocrites I wonder if they could ever have the courage to admit they were wrong?

Flag Comment Posted by jbrown11 on February 20, 2009 at 1:44 pm

Gordie and L’Burg Res…..

I am quite enjoying our discussion as we are all sharing from a place of our firm beliefs and avoiding ad hom attacks. I look forward to doing moreso over the weekend.

But for now, in short let me say that I of course understand your acceptance of a power greater than ours. I think most people understand that and accept it. not because they need a crutch. I can accept we don’t need to understand everything. As I Christian I readily claim that I can’t fathom everything of God because if I could I would be God. Heck, as a male I can’t even understand a lot of the female gender.  LOL

Lack of understanding is not a problem for me. It doesn’t mean I choose to be stupid. Rather I look rationally, and ask how this world or universe came into being, how people really do experience genuine healing (I’m not talking about the Benny Hinn circus tent kind of stuff)outside of healing, how really living the principles of the Bible will lead to a fulfilled life (and I don’t mean a prosperity, health and wealth, pie-in-the-sky, what can I get for myself “Christianity”), what will change the life of an angry,  selfish, judgemental person I have been and know I can be.  Yes, i look at those things, those questions, and choose to believe, by faith, that God is who He says He is.

My pastor, Rick Warren, no screaming fundy, says he would be a Christian regardless of a heaven or hell. I agree. It doesn’t necessarily, in fact clearly won’t, make life easy. The Bible calls us to suffer. But is a life of contentment for the soul, and one that I believe I have been called to. I really hope that doesn’t sound pious or arrogant because I believe all mankind is called to that. Sadly, many Christians, who I think beleive on the most basic, but miss out so much when they attack others out of arrogance or seemingly hate, fail to act in love for the poor, and well, act like sinners that we are. 

I really hate the “sinners aren’t perfect, they are just forgiven” bumper-sticker mentality that so many of us can live by because it can become a cop-out. We aren’t perfect, we are forgiven, but we are forgiven at a high price and we blow it, note I include me, when we act differently. I want to be humble. I want to be transparent. Our spiritual life is a journey, not a completed destiny. I know that sounds so weak in some ways but conversely it shows the strength and mercy of God….that He chooses to overlook that crap in our life because of who He is and what His Son did. When we do ignore that and screw up willingly that becomes “cheap grace” on our part and we better check the truth of our heart.

Well, I know it sounds like I’m teaching Sunday School again. Sorry. Passion takes over sometimes. LOL

Let me part with this. As for “spiritual experiences”. I do believe that the Bible teaches that for those who have never heard about God that He provides an opportunity to still believe, even just by accepting through the wonder and majesty of creation and that vacuum in our soul that tells us there is a power bigger than ours that we subject ourselves to. I’m not comfortable though believing that the Bible allows that for people who have heard about God. I just don’t see that in the Bible I take on faith.

(Buddha….will respond to your email a little later.)

Flag Comment Posted by jbrown11 on February 20, 2009 at 1:01 pm

Gordie…..

You expressed some good, if strong, words to Ben.  I have noticed he has not been on the thread since I challenged him to explain from when original matter came from, i.e. the proverbial “primordial soup” or even “spontaneous combustion”? It’s just pretty hard to get around that question unless you allow for some type of miracle, from someone or somewhere. My girlfriend, a Phd in BioMechanics at Duke University and I enjoyed a nice conversation about that last night.

Flag Comment Posted by LynchburgRes on February 20, 2009 at 11:41 am

Unfortunately, we can’t bring back a religious experience, or a meeting with the infinite without using words. Those words are merely metaphors for what happened. If you write those words down, sooner or later some evangelistic ignoramus will take those words literally.
Another name for such experiences is called a Shamanic experience. All religion starts as Shamanic experiences. The one experiencing them tries their best to explain what happened. Sooner or later someone mediates what happened so other people can sort of understand. One of those people thinks that by reading about the experience they can understand it. They can’t, but they preach about it anyway. Then the charlatans move in and start asking for money… It become pop-culture and you get everything from Charmed to Touched By An Angel. In the Christian world you get fundie evangelists and in the pagan world you get fluffy bunnies, all in all they are all looking for a way to feel beeter about themselves at someone else’s expense.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement