More on Expelled

I'm going to see Leatherheads this afternoon rather than view Expelled, but despite my lack of interest in seeing the "documentary" (I've never seen any of Michael Moore's pieces either), I'm interested in the response. I wanted to share here responses not by atheists or nonbelievers or such, but those who look at this issue from a faith lens. In other words, you can check out Dawkins and others on your own.

First, although we shouldn't blame Stein for any guilt by association antics, but I think it's important to note that Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis is supporting the movie, even though he's not an ID backer (he's an old style creationist). Ham writes:

In summarizing Expelled’s ultimate goal, Stein declares that he wants to see a world where “scientists are supposed to be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it may lead, no matter what the implications are. Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, it’s anti-science. It’s anti-the whole concept of learning.”6

AiG has not been sanguine about elements of the intelligent design movement and some of its well-intentioned activists. But having watched the movie twice now, we note that the film is not about trying to push ID on society, much less argue that ID should be mandated in schools (which AiG would not support).7 Also, the film makes it clear that the ID movement is
not a Christian one (although many evangelicals are part of it). More than anything, the documentary seeks to expose the ruthlessness of radical atheists and evolutionists and their attempt to erode freedom in order to protect their own worldview. In its goal, Expelled has marvelously succeeded.

The problem with this thesis is that not all proponents of evolution are radical atheists. Sure Dawkins is, but there are many others like John Polkinghorne, Howard Van Til, Francis Collins, and Kenneth Miller, among others who are strong Christians and yet affirm evolution.

Belief Net's Movie Mom in contrast pans the movie. She opens with this paragraph, which seems to catch the issue:

There may be a good argument to make on behalf of teaching Intelligent Design in science class, but this documentary from Ben Stein does not make it. The movie itself is an example of design by faith and emotion rather than intelligence, defined as rationality grounded in proof. Instead of making a straightforward case for Intelligent Design as a scientific theory, Stein employs misdirection and guilt by very tangential association to try to make his case.

I'll leave this one for your consideration, as we go on to another Beliefnet review offered by Idol Chatter, which concludes:

Like many cannonades in the culture wars, "Expelled" is designed to not to scatter the enemy, but to hearten the loyal. After the Potemkin battle is inevitably won, Stein is sure to award himself a gaily ribboned medal. His own peroration is intercut with footage of President Ronald Reagan speaking in Berlin, challenging Gorbachev to "tear down this wall," equating "Expelled" with
the fight against Communist oppression and Stein himself to the Great Communicator. If you believe that one, you'll believe we were put here by space aliens.

On the other hand, the political conservative movement likes it, not for its theological positions, but for its attempt to like Darwin to the Nazi's and the Soviets. You see this in the American Spectator review. Thus, it is an expression of culture wars politics more than an argument for intellectual freedom. I know all about intellectual freedom within conservative Christian institutions -- it is very tenuous.

I found this post at the site Higgaion interesting. This blog is the work of a Pepperdine University religion professor. Chris Head, the author of the blog notes that in an interview the Associate Editor of the film notes that if they would have included someone like Kenneth Milller, author of Finding Darwin's God, a believing Roman Catholic, and an evolutionary biologist, would have "unnecessarily confused the audience." In other words the point of the movie is to extend the either/or dichotomy that folks like Dawkins on one hand and the Philip Johnson and the Discovery Institute on the other want to insist on.

Finally, for more on this issue, I'll send you to James McGrath's blog -- Exploring our Matrix. James is a religion professor at Butler University with a special interest in the intersection of religion and science. He has a number of posts that are worth looking at, plus more links.

The key point I want to make through all of this is that the idea that one must choose between evolution and faith is wrong. I have argued this point on many an occasion. We are, in my mind, ill served as people of faith to perpetuate this argument. It's not just a science issue, it's a faith one. We do unnecessary damage to our faith by insisting that people choose.