# My dream for a Christian university that offers research degrees in science



## Tim (Aug 14, 2008)

Let me tell you all my dream. 

I dream that some day, students will be able to go to a well-respected (science) research university that is Christian in its world-view.

The Christian universities I know are primarily undergraduate and liberal arts. 

Presently, if you want to be a scientist and you are a Christian, you have to go to a secular university. You can't get your PhD from homeschooling or your local Christian college!

Let us all remember that most of the Ivy-league schools were founded as Christian schools. Harvard, as I understand, required students to be able to defend a theological thesis in order to graduate, even if they weren't divinity students.

One thing I have heard, though, is that Baylor at one point in the last decade or so had some sort of move towards a solid Christian world-view (anti-evolution, etc). But I think this was stopped by the top leadership. Does anyone know anything else about this?

Okay...who shares my dream?


----------



## Reformed Baptist (Aug 14, 2008)

that's a nice dream. I hope it happens by time my kids are college ready. My dream is that more churches will teach theology and the centers for theological education like pastors get in seminary.


----------



## sastark (Aug 14, 2008)

Tim, 

You have posted what has weighed heavy on my heart for many years. A friend of mine and I have talked at length about exactly this: We want a Christian university that offers degrees in the sciences. This is the reason I am pursuing a Master's (and afterwards, Lord willing, a PhD). 

When I decided to go to grad school, I wanted to get a Master's in Geography (what I have my B.A. in) from a Christian university. THERE WERE NONE. No Christian university offered one. I was sick of the secular worldview from my undergrad days, and didn't want to sit through another 2-3 years of it to get a Master's degree.

In my search for Christian alternatives, I finally stumbled upon Biola's Master of Arts in Science and Religion. I ended up applying and being accepted. My plan is to use this as a stepping stone to a higher degree so that I can teach Geography from a Biblical perspective.

One thing that my friend and I have discussed is the need for LOTS of money to start this university. So, if you want to see a Christian (reformed) University that offers science/research degrees, start saving your money!

And pray. A lot.




Tim said:


> Let me tell you all my dream.
> 
> I dream that some day, students will be able to go to a well-respected (science) research university that is Christian in its world-view.
> 
> ...


----------



## toddpedlar (Aug 14, 2008)

I don't mean to be a wet blanket... but, speaking as a scientist and a reformed Christian, here are my 4 cents. (inflation, you know)

I presume you're talking strictly about graduate degrees in the sciences, and not undergraduate education, whose focus is entirely different. In this case, I would argue that the kind of institution you dream about isn't the most helpful thing we can aim for in education, for several reasons.

First, "Research degrees" are needed by only a very, very tiny percentage of the population of students who begin as undergraduate majors in the sciences. For almost all jobs one can get in the sciences, a BA or BS is perfectly sufficient. For true research jobs, one needs more education - but this is a tiny fraction of degree students. We are FAR MORE in need of Christian undergraduate institutions that are solidly grounded in Reformed orthodoxy. There are few, precious few, of these around in the entire world - but these are what we desperately need.

Second, advanced study would not be well served by anything you might imagine done differently at a Christian institution. The kind of study one does in graduate school is very highly focused, and aimed at one thing - providing the student with the best training possible for detailed work in the sciences and engineering. I really can't imagine what you would posit as the distinguishing characteristics for such an institution. By the time one is a graduate student, one's worldview will already be well formed by influences that have taken root long before arrival at the ripe old age of 22. I can't decide what I think would be done differently at an institution that you're considering except having Christian seminars on philosophy and history of science or what have you. In almost every field there would be little done differently than at a secular institution. Physics is physics. Math is math. Chemistry is chemistry. Perhaps in some segments of biology and astronomy there may be different things studied (but those things are precisely those that would discredit the institution in the world's eyes, and cause your "reputable Christian research university" idea to crumble in a heap of dust). 

My criticism boils down to this. We don't need institutions that basically provide a "Christian ghetto" for Christian students and faculty to hide out in and do "Christian" science, separate from the lepers in the outside world. There really is very little that one can call "Christian science" that isn't just "science" with a Christian foundation guiding the student or researcher underneath it all. What makes science "Christian" is the Christian scientist.

What we need is sound Reformed churches who compel students to think constantly in terms of their service in their vocations to the Sovereign, Almighty God - their work will flow from a foundation of sound Christian thought... and they will lead others in doing the same.


----------



## Answerman (Aug 14, 2008)

toddpedlar said:


> What we need is sound Reformed churches who compel students to think constantly in terms of their service in their vocations to the Sovereign, Almighty God - their work will flow from a foundation of sound Christian thought... and they will lead others in doing the same.


Yep, this pretty much sums it up. The only thing that I would ad, is that this needs to start from infancy and not stop until the disciple is mature enough to spot the antithesis between Christian and secular thought that they will find in whichever field they choose to serve God in.

The problem my wife and I had when starting to educate our children was that we came to the realization that we had not been taught to think like a Christian in the government controlled schools, so in our house we are having to learn along side our children and encourage them to go beyond our understanding in science and other subjects. Certainly evolution is the prime example in an antithesis in views but we found major differences also in history, philosophy and politics.


----------



## Tim (Aug 15, 2008)

Todd, it's good to have your perspective on what I have written. I think that there is a definite necessity for a Christian institution of scientific research. 



toddpedlar said:


> First, "Research degrees" are needed by only a very, very tiny percentage of the population of students who begin as undergraduate majors in the sciences.



Let me tell you a bit more why I think this sort of research degree is important. Students must be taught (1) scientific truth operating within (2) a consistent worldview. This truth largely begins at the research universities.

So, my first point is this: What we teach our fourth graders today was 'discovered' by those who, in the past, worked in the frontier of that field (i.e., he did research). From a novel ideas perspective, Darwin was such a pioneer. He thought new thoughts. His theories were not immediately accepted, but now they are. Most people now believe that we are advanced apes. *It's a "trickle down of ideas" sort of thing.* 

Another example is the thorough penetration of humanism into psychology and political theory. This was not always the case and people used to believe that man was 'basically good' and provided the ultimate standard of ethics. But, certain intellectuals were able to have their ideas accepted by the laymen. These ideas all were first forwarded at the forefront of thinking (i.e., research). They then communicated to an increasing number of persons until they almost thoroughly penetrate today's thinking: in the research meeting, the undergraduate classroom, and public school alike. 



> Second, advanced study would not be well served by anything you might imagine done differently at a Christian institution.... In almost every field there would be little done differently than at a secular institution. Physics is physics. Math is math. Chemistry is chemistry.





> There really is very little that one can call "Christian science" that isn't just "science" with a Christian foundation guiding the student or researcher underneath it all.



I disagree. It may look the same on the outside, but these sciences ultimately cannot be done according to a non-Christian world-view. I don't think any field is intrinsically neutral. 

This leads me to my second point, which has to do with operating consistently according to one's world-view. If you get much into presuppositional apologetics, you will learn that the relativist cannot make meaningful statements. As such, he cannot say, "this is how the heart functions"; "this is what happens when water runs over rocks". You can only do science according to the Christian world-view. Atheistic professors borrow from the Christian world-view (unknowingly) in order to make their 'absolute' statements. 

The ultimate conclusion to this inconsistency, likely many years down the road, is that students will start to question the philosophy employed in all aspects of higher education. They will discover that it can't make sense according to how it is presented. That is, *science doesn't work if there isn't a God. If we train our scientists to conduct their work as if there is no God, they are ultimately being intellectually dishonest, whether they realize it or not*. 



> For almost all jobs one can get in the sciences, a BA or BS is perfectly sufficient.



Can you see how it is not about "getting a job". It has to do with truth itself. Theology used to be regarded as the "queen of sciences" because it provided for the necessary unification of diverse 'truths'. The Puritans at their fledgling Ivy-league universities understood this. My dream is that this would someday again be the case. *I dream that science research would again operate according to the world-view that makes it possible. *



> Perhaps in some segments of biology and astronomy there may be different things studied (but those things are precisely those that would discredit the institution in the world's eyes, and cause your "reputable Christian research university" idea to crumble in a heap of dust).



I do agree with you here, Todd. Unfortunately this does seem to be the state of things. But perhaps someday people will realize that a Christian world-view is necessary.


----------



## toddpedlar (Aug 15, 2008)

Tim said:


> Todd, it's good to have your perspective on what I have written. I think that there is a definite necessity for a Christian institution of scientific research.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I actually think this is a mistake. The truth must be taught far earlier than at the research university level. If a foundation is given to students before the research university level, then students are prepared to properly address research once and if they reach that level. Without that foundation given at an early age (and I agree with another commenter that it must be given at the get-go, and not just at the undergraduate level) it is exceedingly hard (impossible) to introduce that anew at the graduate level.



> So, my first point is this: What we teach our fourth graders today was 'discovered' by those who, in the past, worked in the frontier of that field (i.e., he did research). From a novel ideas perspective, Darwin was such a pioneer. He thought new thoughts. His theories were not immediately accepted, but now they are. Most people now believe that we are advanced apes. *It's a "trickle down of ideas" sort of thing.*
> 
> Another example is the thorough penetration of humanism into psychology and political theory. This was not always the case and people used to believe that man was 'basically good' and provided the ultimate standard of ethics. But, certain intellectuals were able to have their ideas accepted by the laymen. These ideas all were first forwarded at the forefront of thinking (i.e., research). They then communicated to an increasing number of persons until they almost thoroughly penetrate today's thinking: in the research meeting, the undergraduate classroom, and public school alike.



Again, though this needs to be addressed very early - long before anyone attempts study at the MS or PhD level. 



> > Second, advanced study would not be well served by anything you might imagine done differently at a Christian institution.... In almost every field there would be little done differently than at a secular institution. Physics is physics. Math is math. Chemistry is chemistry.
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree. It may look the same on the outside, but these sciences ultimately cannot be done according to a non-Christian world-view. I don't think any field is intrinsically neutral.



That's not what I'm saying. I am a full supporter of Van Til's and Rushdoony's views on this matter - my point is that doing scientific research uses the techniques and ideas and philosophical points of view that ultimately derive from a Christian (and no other) worldview. However, the practice of research and application of theoretical concepts is no different - as you have rightly said, atheistic scientists use the framework that comes from Christian theism.... so in a very real sense, physics is physics, as it were. (but the non-Christian scientist simply uses that borrowed capital unbeknownst to him)

The foundational ideas have to be ingrained and taught at the basic level - before the advanced study that goes on at the graduate level... hence my emphasis and belief that your proposal misses the boat in terms of the timing of ingraining of those ideas we both support.


----------



## sastark (Aug 15, 2008)

Tim said:


> I don't think any field is intrinsically neutral.


----------



## Tim (Aug 15, 2008)

toddpedlar said:


> The foundational ideas have to be ingrained and taught at the basic level - before the advanced study that goes on at the graduate level... hence my emphasis and belief that your proposal misses the boat in terms of the timing of ingraining of those ideas we both support.



We are definitely arguing different things, then. I never said anything about not wanting early Christian education. 

All I was doing was expressing my desire for a Christian research university. You have Christian schools for children, Christian liberal arts universities, but no Christian research universities. And my dream remains that someday, Christians will again be able to take dominion over academic institutions, both undergraduate and research-intensive.


----------



## sastark (Aug 15, 2008)

toddpedlar said:


> The foundational ideas have to be ingrained and taught at the basic level - before the advanced study that goes on at the graduate level... hence my emphasis and belief that your proposal misses the boat in terms of the timing of ingraining of those ideas we both support.



Todd, I agree with this, but also think it is necessary to continue studying creation from a Biblical worldview at the undergrad, grad and postgrad levels.


----------

