Timely post indeed. I was directed here to read this after a recent conversation addressing this topic came up on my blog.
Homeschooling will work nicely for us. To be sure, since most Christian homeschoolers educate their children at home in order to protect them from things like mainstream science, we will face some level of discord with my children’s homeschooling friends and with our church. But unlike our Christian school friends, we won’t be required to launch any messy school board challenges in order to get actual science taught to our children: we can teach using any science curriculum we want, Christian or secular, while also being diligent to answer the “Who” question that science has no answer for.
I’m not saying this is the best solution for everyone, but it certainly works in an ironic way. As I remarked on my blog, although shielding children from mainstream science was one of the primary attractions to homeschooling, we’re homeschooling in order to shield our kids from anti-science mindsets in Christian schools.

I would be remiss not to recommend my friend Gordon J. Glover’s excellent video series on science in Christian education: http://www.blog.beyondthefirmament.com/video-presentations/science-and-christian-education/
To begin the process mentioned in this article, I think our focus for spreading such information should not be to shoot a shotgun in the dark, but to target those who will be likeliest to listen *based upon personal interaction*. Sharing this sort of information among the YEC friends we’re closest to and with those who seem likeliest to respond (most open-minded, least committed to hard creationism, etc.) seems the best way forward.
We need it to ripple through to our clergy, as well — not because we want them to teach evolution from the pulpit, but because we don’t want them to teach creationism from the pulpit.

Great post! I homeschool my kids and so far they have no questions about the bible and evolution. When reading Genesis to them my 5 year old said “so 1 day to God is like many years to us”. I have trouble understanding the fight on this subject. God made us an AWESOME world, and we owe it to our kids to teach them all we can about it, so we can be proper stewards for it.

Darrell,
This discussion somewhat reminds me of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale about the king without clothing. Perhaps once again, a child will alert us to the nakedness of our theories and the power of group-think? After all, God has created true praise on the lips of the little ones.

I’m glad to see more Christians standing up for truth, although I personally wonder how one goes about believing the Bible is divinely inspired while also accepting scientific facts and principles. Still, if the result is better educated children, I’m thrilled.

“This discussion somewhat reminds me of Hans Christian Andersen’s tale about the king without clothing. Perhaps once again, a child will alert us to the nakedness of our theories and the power of group-think?”

Actually this blog has already pointed out how vacuous ID is.

Dr. Falk, thank you for this excellent post. This is becoming a critical issue for me as my wife and I homeschool our young children in a very conservative homeschool group with a Young Earth Creationist viewpoint.
Most members of our beloved church family are either Young Earth Creationists or Intelligent Design proponents. There is no way we would leave our church, but it bothers me more and more that we aren’t addressing the problem of the literal creationist interpretation of the Bible in view of the findings of science. I’m really concerned that we will raise a generation of young people who are faithful to the church but are intellectually dishonest, or that more young people will simply abandon their faith altogether.
I find myself in the artist class you noted in your essay above. I write and direct films based on Bible stories with our church’s 5th and 6th grade Sunday School kids. (www.jamfilms.com) I’m passionate about teaching truth to our young people, and teaching them to always seek the truth, even if the search makes us uncomfortable. I wish I had a way to plug in to this movement of faith and intellectual honesty for the sake of our children.
Again, thanks for writing this essay. It reveals the heart of the struggle we face as a minority group who is more interested in finding the truth than in defending what we already believe.
Greg

Daniel Mann wants us to be aware of the insidious “power of group think”.
Hoo boy. Obviously he’s never hung around theologians much. I’d say they’re even more prone to that danger than your typical scientist.
Funny, YECs and IDers often claim that people are afraid to espouse their views because they’d lose their jobs. I’d love to see how many preachers would lose their jobs if they espoused the truth of evolution.
Cuts both ways.

“Daniel Mann wants us to be aware of the insidious ‘power of group think’. Hoo boy. Obviously he’s never hung around theologians much. I’d say they’re even more prone to that danger than your typical scientist.”

Are you kidding? Theologians can hardly be accused of always agreeing with each other!

“I’d love to see how many preachers would lose their jobs if they espoused the truth of evolution.”

Probably a lot, but my guess is that many would dearly love to teach their congregations that evolution is a reality (without splitting their churches). And this web site just might help them do that.

What makes anyone think that when Genesis 1 says ‘there was evening and there was morning, one day’ and ‘there was evening and there was morning, a second day’ that a day was any less time passing by then than it is now? Why is it so hard for people to accept the fact that God is perfectly capable of creating such vastness and complexity in 24 hour days? If you truly believe he is the God he says he is, you should know he is beyond able to do such a thing. He speaks and things are – why would he drag it out over thousands of years?
Preachers probably would lose their jobs if they were to teach ‘evolution’, simply because they would be preaching something other than the truth.

This is an important post for me, the father of two young daughters.
Indeed, the last thing we want to do is leave or churches or remove ourselves from their influence.
Every book we have about Noah’s ark has ostriches and tigers and penguins on the ark (thank goodness no dinosaurs yet!). This is what my kids hear at church as well. My concern is that if we teach the bible as truth and then mix in with that truth this kind of fairy tale version of Noah’s ark, will the bible become like Santa Claus – OK for little kids but they will soon grow out of it? The story of Noah’s ark tells valuable theological truths like God’s judgement of sin and the importance of living a righteous life of obedience before God. Why can we not have some books about that?
Does anybody recommend any books about creation, Noah’s ark, the tower of babel etc.. that tell the theological truth of the story for young kids rather than telling falsehoods about science?

We, too, are homeschooling our kids and would like to teach both the Bible and science with integrity. There are copious resources available from anti-evolution Christians, but I’m unaware of even a support group email list for Christian homeschoolers who worship God as Creator and still accept evolutionary science.
Just today a family in our area sent out an email asking for advice on science curriculum for their early elementary kids. I know some folks with strong opinions will point them to AIG’s materials – but I don’t know anything else to recommend that is anywhere nearly as well put together. YEC materials speak passionately & winningly to both parents and children, but we spend our time at theological conferences on “science & faith.” If we accuse others of bearing false witness, we certainly bear the guilt of failing to bear sufficient witness.
Frankly, I’d love to write some of those books that Jonathan would like to read with his daughters, and to encourage fellow homeschoolers like Greg to feel less isolated. I know that opposition within one’s own beloved community can be most intimidating, but even so the day for this kind of networking is long overdue!
Andrew Wetzel
andwetzel [self-circling "a" thingy] Gmail [dot] com

“What makes anyone think that when Genesis 1 says ‘there was evening and there was morning, one day’ and ‘there was evening and there was morning, a second day’ that a day was any less time passing by then than it is now? Why is it so hard for people to accept the fact that God is perfectly capable of creating such vastness and complexity in 24 hour days? If you truly believe he is the God he says he is, you should know he is beyond able to do such a thing. He speaks and things are – why would he drag it out over thousands of years?”

There are very good reasons NOT to take Genesis literally, and if you’ll read through the posts on this site you’ll find those reasons.
The real question is, why would God create the universe in 6 literal days and then make it look as if he took billions of years doing it. Is he a lying charlatan?

Science is the best method we have for examining, discovering and understanding the physical universe.
Religion, when it does not project upon the physical domain, need never come in conflict with science. When religion makes statements which are literal/historical and have physical aspects, do not be surprised when science pulls the rug out from under belief. Noah’s ark is a classic example. Interpreted metaphorically, it has something to convey. Interpreted as a literal/historic event, it is false beyond a shadow of a doubt. Learning to read the mythic tales of holy books metaphorically retains the message without the inherent weakness of being subject to scientific criticism. And while we are at it: Why is literal belief more important to so many than faith in God? Belief can be an idol, a form that is given greater significance than God. Where belief directs you towards faith, walk towards faith, setting aside the frame when it distracts or inhibits. God is primary, not belief.
The problem of evil continuously collides with a belief that God is all-good. Consider Meister Eckhart’s words:
God is nameless, for no man can either say or understand aught about Him. If I say, God is good, it is not true; nay more; I am good, God is not good. I may even say, I am better than God; for whatever is good, may become better, and whatever may become better, may become best. Now God is not good, for He cannot become better. And if He cannot become better, He cannot become best, for these three things, good, better, and best, are far from God, since He is above all. If I also say, God is wise, it is not true; I am wiser than He. If I also say, God is a Being, it is not true; He is transcendent Being and super-essential Nothingness. Concerning this St Augustine says: the best thing that man can say about God is to be able to be silent about Him, from the wisdom of his inner judgment. Therefore be silent and prate not about God, for whenever thou dost prate about God, thou liest, and commitest sin. If thou wilt be without sin, prate not about God. Thou canst understand naught about God, for He is above all understanding. A master saith: If I had a God whom I could understand, I would never hold Him to be God.
And therein is the essential teaching: Faith in God ultimately requires relinquishing our ideas of God. God no more fits within our limited beliefs than the sun fits within a window frame. The good of the frame is that it directs attention towards the source, and having done that it should fade from my attention. It is as though the groom upon entering the wedding chamber stood transfixed by the veil around his Beloved’s face and refused to part it. Faith allows the veils to part and fall to the floor, as a more clear, direct and beautiful light falls directly upon the lover’s eyes. Faith which transcends belief is unassailable by attacks upon belief. It would be as if a man were heard to criticize the veil which the groom has parted. The groom will not hear such prattle: He is far too focused upon his Beloved to notice.

Thank you, Darrel, for the essay and the conversation-starter.
There is a good discussion from people across the faith/non-faith spectrum at http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/04/27/homeschooling-and-evolution/#comment-12532. It would seem their conclusion after searching is that there really isn’t that much out there in terms of parent-friendly homeschool science curriculum that is not from a YEC (young earth creation) perspective. Their discussion also suggests to me that many of those parents would not object to a theistic evolutionary perspective as long as it is trying not to be exclusionary. So let me echo the call for children’s materials that teach good science!
In the meantime… One of the great things about homeschooling is the opportunity for dialogue between parent-teacher and child. My two children are using Apologia’s Exploring Creation with Astronomy. Their curriculum is about as parent-friendly as it gets, and from a YEC perspective. This perspective is obviously a problem, as is Apologia’s tendency in much of its curriculum to polarize the discussion – either you believe in YEC or you’re an atheist. However, this problem is also an opportunity. In the wide world, our children will be exposed to multiple viewpoints, some helpful and some not so helpful. As our children go through this science curriculum, we can discuss with them the perspective of the authors and how this is not the only possible perspective for a Christian. We can even supplement with other materials which teach a more realistic perspective (but may not be so parent-friendly). The result from discussions like this is that children are not just buckets into which we pour knowledge (and who can later pour it out for a test) but active learners who can utilize logic and problem-solving in separating the wheat from the chaff.
One resource I’ve used with my kids is portions of Denis Lamoureux’s talk Beyond the “Evolution vs. Creation” Debate (audio with graphics) to introduce the concept that Genesis 1 is about why God created and not how God created, and that there are three main Christian positions on origins (YEC, Old Earth Creation and Evolutionary Creation/Theistic Evolution), not just YEC.
The issue of YEC curriculum probably tends more toward “problem” versus “opportunity” during the high school years when kids need serious preparation for college, but our family hasn’t crossed that bridge yet!

A big problem that has been noted by others (see my blog reference immediately above) is that publishers do not believe there is a market for evolutionary creation (or even old-earth creation) homeschool materials. And there may not be. On the other side, I have a feeling that even if these materials were available, the big Christian homeschool curriculum providers would be boycotted if they offered them.
John Holtzmann (YEC) of Sonlight Curriculum posted a gracious letter encouraging dialog/fellowship with believers who (gasp!) hold to an OEC perspective (http://www.sonlight.com/young_or_old_earth.html). However, even the hint that Sonlight may be “soft” on YEC has given them significant problems; see http://johnscorner.blogspot.com/2009/02/mark-looy-replies.html. Just think what would happen if Sonlight sold evolutionary creation materials! They would be bashed at nearly every Christian homeschool conference around the country.
What am I getting at? I’m not sure. If there’s currently not a significant market for the stuff we’re interested in, either 1) we need to help create one, by working with parents and homeschool organizations to create space for evolutionary creation or 2) just focus our attention on secular publishers who may at least teach good science, and supplement with materials that teach God as creator, etc. I suppose a third option, more realistic these days, is niche publishing, where advertising is mainly word-of-mouth.
Exploring option 1 a bit more… Who wants to take the heat and do things like try to organize a forum at homeschool conferences where evolutionary creation is mooted? Could be a very exciting time! On a front wider than just homeschoolers, it is encouraging to see BioLogos and others (cf. the blog “An Evangelical Dialogue on Evolution, http://evanevodialogue.blogspot.com/2007/05/welcome-to-dialogue.html) working on position statements that emphasize unity and dialogue over strife and name-calling. Please pray for the fall workshop led by Tim Keller (http://www.biologos.org/projects/workshops) where 15 leading scientists, 15 leading theologians, and 15 leading pastors from the Evangelical community will gather and maybe get a start on such a statement!

I am very new to this concept, but am quite interested in learning. I am a homeschooling mom of 8 children.
I would like to ask what specific books the author would recommend for the older high school student. I know that you have books in your sidebar – but which would be the absolute best ones for explaining all of this to an older kid who has only known the YEC side of things?

“Actually this blog has already pointed out how vacuous ID is.”
beaglelady shows why Christians have good reasons to dread being around secularism and its rabid proponents. Not to mention the unhealthy physical conditions that exist in that environment.
Evolution is proved in the reality that a person evolves from being worldy to being a believer in Christ Jesus as the savior.
From reprobate to believer.
Like monkey to man.

Holly, I hope Darrel will give his recommendations for “first books” on this topic, but for my part, I would second Steve’s recommendation of Gordon Glover’s “Beyond the Firmament” book & videos. I’d also recommend the Haarsmas’ “Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation,” for a good overview; and I’ve found Del Ratzsch’s “Battle of the Beginnings” to be good training for fact-checking and an excellent plea for approaching this debate with integrity. Karl Gibertson’s “Saving Darwin,” with it’s autobiographical framework, may also be appealing, though I haven’t read that one.
I’ve also enjoyed reading non-fiction graphic novels with my kids. Though it’s not written from a Christian perspective, “The Sandwalk Adventures,” by Jay Hosler is an amazing & wonderful introduction to what Darwin’s theory actually says – with a good dose of humor! (His book on the life-cycle of a bee, “Apis,” was also a favorite read-aloud with my 8-12 yo bunch.)
Of course, what’s appropriate depends on your particular family & your particular reader(s). Feel free to contact me if you would like to bounce ideas around or address concerns. [I'm pretty sure that invitation would apply to other homeshoolers on this thread as well! ]

I appreciate the problem. I am a geophysicist who started out in the geosciences as a young-earth creationist. I nearly became an atheist. Because I saw geological data every day at work, I couldn’t ignore it. But because I wanted history in a scriptural interpretation, none of the standard theological explanation for how to fit an old earth and evolution into a biblical interpretation worked for me. All the views which incorporated evolution and an old earth left me feeling like the Bible wasn’t true, not saying anything at all about reality.
I finally settled on an interpretation which maintains historicity and accepts science. But the 10 years of struggle was very painful. I found an old (4th century) intepretation which could allow one to believe the creation account is historical while at the same time accepting all science.
Here is how I finally figured out what to do with Gen 1
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/daysofproclamation.htm
I now believe that the Bible actually teaches evolution
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/Gen1-11.htm
This is why I believe that the early Bible is historically true.
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/genesis.htm

Home Schooling parents who want to give their children a good education on the evolution and faith issue can probably assemble a good unit on this themselves using readily available materials. A good start would be these resources available online. Especially good are Francis Collins’ article and Galileo’s amazingly sharp perspective from 1615.
1. American Scientific Affiliation. 2000. Commission on Creation.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/evolution/commission_on_creation.html
2. Francis S. Collins. 2003. Can an evangelical believe in evolution?
International Journal of Frontier Missions. 20(4): 109-112.
http://www.ijfm.org/PDFs_IJFM/20_4_PDFs/109_Collins.pdf
3. Roy A. Clouser. 1991. Genesis on the origin of the human race.
Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 43 (1): 2-13.
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1991/PSCF3-91Clouser.html
4. Galileo Galilei. 1615. Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina of Tuscany.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/galileo-tuscany.html
5. Michael Wanous. 2007. South Dakota Academy of Sciene Presidential Address.
Evolution and Faith: Complementary or Conflicting Visions?
http://acadsci.sdstate.org/search/files/2007/11-17.pdf
6. Ernst Mayr. 2000. Darwin’s influence on modern thought.
Scientific American (Jul. 2000): 79-83.
http://www.udel.edu/anthro/krosenberg/mayr.pdf
If you want to go into more depth, have your children read Darrel Falk’s excellent book, Coming to Peace with Science. Link is shown at the top of the blog page.

Thank you, Circle Reader!

I just wanted to say how Dr. Falk’s words are a real breath of fresh air for me…..As an evangelical biologist who grew up with creationism in sunday school….then to I.D. in college….searching for the truth but always at odds with both science and faith, I found his book “Coming to Peace with Science” seriously lifechanging. It is a MUST read….The BioLogos foundation is the real deal…I really appreciate what Falk and Giberson are trying to do—be bridge-builders between the truth of science and the truth in the Word. They can and do coexist!

We want our children to be brought up with respect for the Bible as the Word of God.
Don’t you know it’s wicked to lie to children?

0 x 0 = Atheism.
Teach children the scientific facts.

I very much agree with Falk that we should not exclude people out of our lives due to their conflicting beliefs. I also agree that in today’s world, the church supports many life values and a strong sense of community. These can both be good for a child. But we also do not just want to teach our children what to think, but also how to think. In order to do this, our children must learn about theories, evidence and probability before they grow up to personally define their own beliefs. To believe in something without evidence, is one of the definitions of faith. Children must then learn that faith cannot lead to conclusions, only to help fill in personal necessary answers for humanity’s unanswered questions. It is through evidence that we define truth and, if children learn this, more will proactively contribute to discovering the truth.

This is how the world can effectively search for the truth: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/326/5949/53.pdf
(published from the journal Science)

For me this topic is much Interesting.Children are future. Shaving children in todays’ world is great task. Teaching should be much Efficient,because at small stage only we can feed good to child.I believe in harmony,thus i have love over children. They should taught with Difference.

Prof. Falk – if we know science to be the effective means of describing physical reality, and that evolution is true, I believe it’s incumbent on us to not only tell our children, but to engage our pastors and fellow adult believers. This can be difficult; it is for me. But better truth with difficulty than having raised a child who discovers her parent has been weak-kneed and deceiving her.

Darrel,
Thanks for raising awareness on this issue. I recently wrote a few paragraphs of specific advice for parents and Sunday School teachers for the magazine of my denomination, the Christian Reformed Church, available here:
http://www.thebanner.org/magazine/article.cfm?article_id=2042
Our denomination has also produced materials that can be used in Sunday School which teach youth that there are multiple points of view on creation/evolution. By putting more than one view on the table, young earth parents are assured that their kids are seeing the young earth view, yet kids are exposed to old earth views that are compatible with the mainstream scientific evidence. The curricula also aim to defuse tensions and teach some basic principles (like God’s two books of revelation).
For grades 6-8 :
http://www.faithaliveresources.org/Walk-With-Me-Yr-3-6-8-Unit-5-Leader
http://www.faithaliveresources.org/Walk-With-Me-Yr-3-6-8-Unit-5-Discover-Creation-and-Science-Student
For grades 9-12:
http://www.faithaliveresources.org/Fossils-and-Faith-Leaders-Guide
http://www.faithaliveresources.org/Fossils-and-Faith-Student-Newspapers
Dr. Deborah Haarsma
Calvin College Physics & Astronomy
http://www.calvin.edu/~dhaarsma

One can only hope that Dr. Haarsma and her colleagues are able to extend their efforts, to teach youth that there are multiple points of view on the shape of the Earth, so that flat earth parents are assured that the kids are seeing the flat earth view, yet kids are exposed to round earth views that are compatible with the mainstream scientific evidence.
Teach the controversy!