I would welcome a EC textbook, but I don't think that it's that crucial.
For starters, I don't think that most textbooks are explicitly antagonist
toward EC the way they might be toward YEC (of course, if I were to write a
textbook, I'd be antagonistic toward YEC as well, although probably with a
little more sympathy for their motives). My judgment is that most
textbooks aren't too concerned with an atheistic, materialistic worldview.
Their concerned with the scientific matter at hand. Even someone as
thoroughly committed to atheism as Peter Atkins writes his general chem
text or physical chem text from an "a-metaphysical" point of view for the
most part. (In fact we use these books at Calvin. It makes for quite an
interesting discussion when the students learn about his metaphysics and
then how we can use such a book at a Christian college.) I am also
familiar with Scott Foresman's Discovering Science curriculum (which I
would recommend hightly); we have used all six grade school grades in
homeschool our 5 kids, who seem to be turning into EC's although they get a
good dose of YEC at church and now this past year from fellow 8th graders
at the Christian school where our oldest attended for the first time. The
teachers seemed to be old-earthers and had no problems with an evolutionary
point of view as long as it was taught from a theistic orientation.
The SF material presented evolutionary theory, paleontology, and old-earth
geology so that I did not feel in the least that it was a threat to our
Christian belief (and by the way, Russ, very conservative view of
scripture).
Dick Wright has done a nice job in Biology Through the Eyes of Faith,
although I wouldn't exactly call his book a biology textbook. It is a
supplemental text that deals with the issues that might concern Christians
as they are discussed in a "normal" high school or college biology text.
I personally wouldn't have many problems weaving Wright's material into a
unified textbook, but to be honest, I don't think that the audience would
be that great. Also, there are some very excellent textbooks out there so
why reinvent the wheel.
Finally, and this is gets into the discussion that we have with students
about the Atkins and other "non-Christian" texts. In our Reformed
tradition we believe in "common grace"; that God has even blessed
non-Christians with gifts to study his creation and discover truth.
There's alot to say about that by way of qualification and I include below
a brief essay that I've written on the topic (which I may have posted here
before; I can't remember). But Christians have no corner on the truth in
chemistry, algebra, physics, or biology. Thus, in as much as
non-Christians are talking about God's world using the gifts that God has
given them, we can learn much from them.
___________________
The Similarity of the Christian's and Non-Christian's Science
Modern Christianity struggles with how to relate our Biblical
perspective on reality with present-day science. Science has been very
successful in explaining many aspects of our world, and the fruit of
science and technology is all around us. This struggle is even more
pointed when we see science linked to the anti-Christian and anti-theistic
agenda of Evolutionary Naturalists. Christians who are also practitioners
and students of science see that much of the scientific enterprise can be
conducted without reference to God. This has led some to suggest that
science is religiously neutral or that science is category of description
of the world that is largely independent from and complementary to a
religious description. Thus, it is suggested that, as long as non
Christian scientists do not step outside of the domain of science, i.e. as
long as they only deal with properties, behavior, and the formative history
of physical entities, that the fruit of their science can be incorporated
into a Christian framework.
Practically speaking, it is probably the case that this approach to
science/faith issues works most of the time, however, it seems to me that
this strikes at the heart of a Biblical and Reformed view of knowledge. In
the work of Cornelius Van Til there is a sustained critique of this way of
thinking about science. Van Til argues that the fundamental starting point
for all knowledge is the knowledge of God and the proper creaturely
response to that knowledge. Every fact of science is either interpreted
rightly, acknowledging God as creator, or wrongly, denying God as creator.
In other words, "there are no brute facts". Consequently, when the
unbelieving scientist (or any unbeliever, for that matter) claims some
knowledge, because it denies the most fundamental aspect of that creaturely
knowledge, the knowledge of God, Van Til would say that it is not true
knowledge. He writes in A Survey of Christian Epistemology:
"The argument in favor of Christian theism must therefore seek to prove
that if one is not a Christian theist he knows nothing at all as he ought
to know anything. The difference is not that all men alike know certain
things about the finite universe and that some claim some additional
knowledge, while the others do not. On the contrary, the Christian theist
must claim that he alone has true knowledge about cows and chickens as well
as about God. He does this in no spirit of conceit, because it is a gift
of God's grace. Nor does he deny that there is knowledge after a fashion
that enables the non-theist to get along after a fashion in the world.
This is the gift of God's common grace, and therefore does not change the
absoluteness of the distinction made about the knowledge and ignorance of
the theist and the non-theist respectively."
There are three things to notice in this passage. First, the Christian
theist alone has true knowledge about science. (Van Til talks about cows
and chickens, but we could substitute chemistry, biology, astronomy,
engineering, etc. for cows and chickens.) This is an extraordinary claim
and one for which Van Til has received much criticism. The idea is that
apart from the knowledge of God as Creator and Sustainer that any knowledge
falls short of true knowledge. Thus, only believers, who by the grace of
God confess the true God, can have true knowledge. Another aspect of this
claim is a moral one; the unbeliever "knows nothing at all as he ought to
know anything". Van Til is not saying that the unbeliever knows nothing.
But, since all knowledge carries with it a religious and moral imperative
to worship and serve the Creator, and since unbelievers disobey that
imperative, their knowledge falls short of true knowledge.
The second thing to notice is that while Van Til denies that
unbelievers have true knowledge, he does admit that they have "knowledge
after a fashion". Unbelievers can know chemistry, biology, astronomy,
engineering, etc "after a fashion". Van Til's critics want to call this
"knowledge after a fashion" true knowledge, Van Til wants to reserve the
term "true knowledge" to knowledge that recognizes the knowledge of God and
includes the proper religious/moral response. Thus, the unbeliever's
knowledge of "brute facts" is only "knowledge after a fashion" that allows
the unbeliever to get along in the world. For example, the unbelieving
chemist can mix salicylic acid and acetic anhydride to synthesize aspirin
that can be used to treat a headache. The chemistry and the pharmacology
works just as it does for the believing chemist. But, for the unbeliever,
this is merely "knowledge after a fashion" and not "true knowledge".
The final thing to notice is that Van Til appeals to common grace
as the basis for this "knowledge after a fashion" that the unbeliever has.
Despite their rebellion and as part of the free offer of the gospel, God
allows unbelievers to live in this world that he has created, He has made
them in his image with the capacity to have "dominion over the creatures",
and he has endowed them with gifts to learn about the world "after a
fashion". Such a gracious posture on the part of God will not endure
forever. If they persist in their unbelief and refuse to worship and serve
the Creator, the judgment day will come and the very things that were
manifestations of God's grace toward them will be used as evidence against
them and they will receive their eternal punishment.
Terry G.
_____________________________________________________________
Terry M. Gray, Ph.D. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Calvin College 3201 Burton SE Grand Rapids, MI 40546
Office: (616) 957-7187 FAX: (616) 957-6501
Email: grayt@calvin.edu http://www.calvin.edu/~grayt