The Politics of Science

Written by Drew on January 19th, 2006

Last night, Eric Lyons visited Ashville Road to give a progress report on the work at Apologetics Press in Montgomery. It was good to see him again and hear about the exciting progress he and his colleagues are making. More of us ought to be supporting their work. They are producing invaluable materials that are shedding light on some of the most complicated issues Christians face today.

One of those issues is Darwinian evolution. And while over half of Americans reject this theory, it appears that, in some areas at least, the creationists are losing ground.

Take what’s happening at Samford University, for example. A recent article in the Birmingham News reports,

A planned lecture by intelligent design proponent John Lennox has upset Samford University faculty who don’t want the Baptist-affiliated school to be seen as endorsing teaching alternatives to evolution.

A resolution introduced in the College of Arts and Sciences’ faculty senate describes intelligent design as a political movement, not science. The resolution, by Samford geography professor Max Baber, questions whether Samford should involve itself in a movement that seeks to inject religion into science education in the public schools.

“In accordance with the spirit and letter of Samford’s foundation statements,” Baber’s resolution reads, “we affirm that church and state should remain separate. We therefore protest the president’s decision to involve Samford in a political movement that stands in direct opposition to that principle.”

The senate has formed a committee to examine the issue.

To be fair, it does not seem that the controversy has swayed Samford President Tom Corts in his decision to invite Lennox. As far as I know, he is still scheduled to speak February 23.

It’s a little hard to listen to Baber lecture John Lennox on science. Lennox is a research fellow in mathematics at Green College, Oxford University in England. His views are hardly the result of his desire to “inject religion” into science. His point is simply that the complexity of biological life suggests a Designer guides the process. He accepts Darwin’s idea that species adapt and change in response to their environments–an idea that most level-headed Christians do not contest–but he questions whether species evolve into other species.

Why is a so-called Christian university troubled by the presence of a scientist who claims to have evidence favoring a Creator? The answer is found in the politics of science. Science has become too political for its own good. It is no longer the objective discipline it once was, satisfied with testing the evidence and letting the results alone. Now it has an agenda, one that seeks to expunge God from the minds of young children.

Part of this problem is fed by the need for financing. Scientists fund their research with grants, most of them coming from government agencies. Right now, the government pushes evolution. And since evolution is where the money is, evolution is what science promotes.

Professors like Max Baber are worried about injecting religion into science education, when it’s already there. Only this religion worships not Jehovah, but gleaming idols in secular temples. The devotion is no less vigorous than that of Christians; however, it is blind. In a field that was founded on free thought, narrow-minded men are stumbling in the dark.

 

Leave a Comment