Posted on 03/06/2010 4:00:10 PM PST by metmom
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Home-school mom Susan Mule wishes she hadn't taken a friend's advice and tried a textbook from a popular Christian publisher for her 10-year-old's biology lessons.
Mule's precocious daughter Elizabeth excels at science and has been studying tarantulas since she was 5. But she watched Elizabeth's excitement turn to confusion when they reached the evolution section of the book from Apologia Educational Ministries, which disputed Charles Darwin's theory.
"I thought she was going to have a coronary," Mule said of her daughter, who is now 16 and taking college courses in Houston. "She's like, 'This is not true!"'
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Oh, I really doubt that. A bit of hyperbole, indicating an article with a political agenda.
"She's like, 'This is not true!"'
OK, Valley Girl. And did Elizabeth pursue the entire context of what is ‘true’ and ‘not true’? Or, did she simply shut down and cease functioning (mentally) at that point?
Thanks, metmom, for the beep.
“B”.
Definitely “B”.
I suspected that since it didn’t fit with the rest of your post.
But thanks for the clarification anyway.
I would think, yes.
Only a liberal would get the vapors when they see something they don't like or disagree with.
This mother is, like, teaching her daughter herself? And the mother is, like, how old?
That’s for sure.
Chronologically? Or, maturity in years? (as if I really had to ask)
I saw some coward in the article said that the phrase about the Christian worldview being the only correct worldview was due to an editing error and would be removed.
“I am not ashamed of the Gospel...”
I was somewhat shocked by that statement by BJU, of all groups.
I think the correction was with the statement that believing in young earth creation was the only way to get to heaven.
ping to 92
“History of Life” chapter that a “Christian worldview ... is the only correct view of reality; anyone who rejects it will not only fail to reach heaven but also fail to see the world as it truly is.”
Here was the statement. I do think they need to clarify it. You won’t fail to get to heaven because you don’t have a “christian worldview” of origins.
It’s not a “salvation essential”,
but the Word is essential to know what is expected of you as a believer,
and that when you start saying this or that part of the Word is “wrong” and that modern secular interpretations are right,
you’re stepping on a slippery slope of self-defining (Gen 3:5) what you want to believe of God’s commands.
“I will hide thy Word in my heart so that I might not sin against Thee”. Well, which part? The “true” part?
Agreed. I think Bob Jones just needed a reword with the “not get to heaven” part.
The way it was worded wasn’t clear.
It really isn’t even technically having a Christian worldview which gets you to heaven. A lot of people have that, which is nice, but if you don’t have Christ, all the Christian world view in the world won’t help.
“but if you don’t have Christ, all the Christian world view in the world won’t help”
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.