Banned in Biology
click for a printer friendly version (PDF)

Like tireless boxers, advocates of evolution and supporters of creationism have fought each other in courtrooms for 80 years. This long-standing feud pits scientific perspectives on the origin of life against religious perspectives. In one corner stands the scientific community, which embraces Charles Darwin’s theory that plant, animal, and human life have developed randomly in stages, evolving from primitive forms to the diversity we see today. In the opposite corner stand segments of the religious community, which embrace the biblical account of a divine Creator who created the world in six days. Although each side has won different rounds, the Supreme Court ruled in 1987 that teaching creationism violates the First Amendment, which requires a separation between church and state.

THE MOST RECENT BOUT

In late September 2005, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III heard arguments in a case brought by parents upset that their local school board required biology teachers to read a four paragraph statement advising students that Darwin’s ideas about evolution were not confirmed facts but only theories. The statement urged students to consider an alternative scientific theory called Intelligent Design (ID), which holds that nature is so complex that it could not have been created without an intelligent designer.

IS INTELLIGENT DESIGN SCIENCE?

Proponents of ID avoid the word God, and they distance themselves from religious terminology. “Our starting point is from science, not from Scripture,” says design theorist and biology professor Michael J. Behe. Judge Jones, however, disagreed. In his ruling—issued in December 2005— Jones criticized ID as creationism in disguise. “It (ID) is an interesting theological argument,” he wrote, “but…not science.” Moreover, because “the religious nature of ID would be readily apparent to an objective observer,” Jones declared that teaching ID in schools is unconstitutional.

THE JEWISH VIEW

Even within private Jewish schools, free to promote religious teachings, educators struggle with this controversial issue. While the Torah clearly states, “God created the heavens and the earth,” Rabbi Brad Hirschfield contends, “Both the positions of Darwinian evolution and those of the intelligent design theorists can fit with classical Jewish thought.”

According to the Rambam’s Guide to the Perplexed, “it is impossible to give a full account of the Creation.” Instead, the Rambam suggests, Creation was “treated in metaphors in order that the uneducated may comprehend it,” and he warns against “examining this subject superficially and unscientifically,” insisting that embracing scientific observations of the natural world will ultimately lead to a greater devotion to God.

By interpreting the Creation story metaphorically and turning to midrashim which explain the “six days” of Creation as six indeterminate stages (Bereishit Rabbah 9), Jews can accept a theory of evolution. By viewing Creation as the goal of an intelligent Creator, Jews can accept Intelligent Design.

Judaism seeks to integrate science into its religious and ethical framework. “The Torah is not a biology text nor even a book of history,” writes Rabbi Dr. Moshe Tendler. “It is an instructional book of morals and ethics.” Nevertheless, he adds, since God created nature and science, “there cannot be real conflict between Torah and science, only apparent disagreement.”