Creation is based on Christianity and you must understand Christianity before you can make claims. Christianity is a very strong force that works in many people’s lives. It gives us morals to live by, inner strength, a reason to live, and much more. It is based on God creating the world in seven days. Most everyone has a religion and can try to imagine what would it be like to live in a world without religion? The way in which religion structures a society helps it to be more successful as a whole. Stanley Tambiah would agree with this, because its similarities to the Trobriands, a tribe that he studied the rituals of and found that the rituals they performed had practical purpose along with the mystical meaning. The Trobriands had certain rituals they must perform when eating yams and they could only eat them at certain times. If the Trobriands did not have the structure to there society all their yams would be eaten to quickly and the tribe would starve. As for our culture, do we need this structure? Americans are in no trouble of running out of yams. Maybe this is why we see a decline in religion in the United States and other developed countries. The practical purpose for Christianity is no longer needed and the religion is losing speed. Although we do not need these rituals to survive, I think the morals behind them have been slipping also. That is why our culture is spiraling out of control.

Besides teaching morals and way to live understanding religions also help to expand the mind. This is supported by the work of Paul Van Buren, who considers religion to be the edges of language. By teaching kids these vast ideas of language it could broaden their minds and expand their understanding of language and where we live. By pushing the kids to the edges of language everything encompassed in that may become a little easier. It is like when I was kicking field goals for the football team. I would go out the sixty-yard line and kick some. After that everything inside of that seemed easier. To add on to this Ludwig Wittgenstein states that language forms what we can think. What we can say limits what can be thought. By opening up these doors of thinking, our children could learn more on think more. This is kind of like giving them more tools to use. Does all this mean religion should be taught in school. The question we are dealing with is whether the Creation aspect of Christianity should be taught in school along with evolution. I feel that Creation could not be taught along with Evolution in a single class. This is because Creation is not based on science. If Creation were taught it would have to be in separate religion class along with other religious theories on the origin of the earth. You would need to do it this because you would be favoring Christianity if you only taught Creation and many people would have a problem with this.

The theory of Creation was put forth in the Bible and it refers to God creating the world in seven days. This theory has much support because of it is a large part of the Christian religion. Creation could be used and would benefit school for several other reasons besides the previous reasons. The first reason would be one supported by Hans Penner. Penner felt that the religious language game was not special and did not have any significance greater than any other language game. This means that being taught in school it would be just another concept of the many taught in school. Many people think that religion is this special thing that must be handled carefully so not to offend anyone. Although I do think it could be handled like this, I also believe that many people would differ with that.

Creation has many benefits that it could give to schools but there are very fundamental reasons why it should not be taught in school. Teaching creation in school hold many problems because of its connection with religion. Creations connection with Christianity is one that cannot be broken. Why would the Christian way of thought be singled out to be taught in school as opposed to the many different other religious interpretations? Creation seems to hold the most parallels with that of science, making it the most plausible. Does this mean that science is the comparison for what is the right theory on the origin of the earth? To me this says that science has found the closest to right answer and because some people cannot get over their need for religion to be the one truth, they try to combine them together. Many religions have come out of trying to combine science and religion such as the Christian Scientists. In these religions the interpretation of the Bible is supposed to be taken rather loosely as opposed to literal. Translating the Bible in this way allows more room to interconnect the ideas presented in the Bible to what we see as truth today. In a few years I believe that there will be another trend to everyone saying that you must take the Bible literally. It seems to just be a trend that changes back and forth. With these knew concepts of religion, the thought of what God is has changed rapidly. The works that most support this are that of Gordon Kaufman. With the increase in communications and availability of information of other cultures, we can investigate hundreds of different religions. In looking at all these religions, how could someone say one is right over the next? Kaufman understands this and presents the idea that everyone agrees that there is some kind of greater being. All the religions have certain overlapping territory in that they all say some kind of greater being or force exists and this is who created us and why we are here.

If we are to teach creation in school, there must be a greater base to it than it teaches morals or expands the minds of our kids. What is the base for Creation? To discover this you must look at Christianity as a whole and see what backs this. From my understanding there is little historical or scientific evidence to support it. If Creation has none of this to back it then why is it so widely accepted and taken for truth? I believe that this is because so many people are Christians, and they must accept the whole Bible as it is. You cannot say that one part of the Bible is wrong, but the rest is still right. If Evolution was accepted and disproved creation in the Bible, the whole faith would unravel.

I spoke about Wittgenstein in one of the previous paragraph and how he states that what can be said shapes what can be thought. If Creation were taught in school, it would be teaching the language game of Christianity. By teaching kids this language game, we would be shaping their minds to that of Christianity. Kids of other religions would be thinking in this manner and it might go against the beliefs of their religion. This goes along with Linbeck’s ideas that religious communities teach the language game of their religion. Not only would some kids be learning other than what they are taught at home, kids who have a background in Christianity would have the advantage of already knowing the language.

From the research I have done I feel that Creation itself would not be such an important factor that I would like to be seen taught in school, but religion classes themselves would hold more value. Where a religion class would teach the kids of different cultures and ways of thinking, I believe simply teaching creation would not hold any advantage. It seems like this is some kind of back door that religious parents are trying to use in order to get their religion taught in school. As for me, I would not mind other religions being taught to my kid, I would want my children to know all the information before they go off believing just anything that I taught them. He could make the choice for himself. Although I can see where these things would help, I believe there would be too many complications in trying to teach it. On top that I also feel that it should be left at that without an argument. If a parent were to push any further, I would have to question their responsibility. Schools do not have to teach you child everything they know. Schools teach so much already, do you want your kid to only learn stuff from school. As a parent I would hope that I could at least teach my child religion along with many other things. We have become so dependant on school, it seems somewhat ridiculous. Back when my Grandfather was at school it was completely different. To bring this to a close I would like to say that although I am a religious person and would like to see what my faith calls on taught in school, but I believe the controversies it raises lays this idea to rest.