I think it is impossible to teach from a totally 'neutral' position - but the important thing is to make it clear that you have a view on this and then present all the evidence for any particular topic in as broad a way as possible. I agree with you that this teacher was not being professional in giving such a biassed account - but in my view she just needed to be frank with the class and say, 'This is what I think and why' THEN, THE IMPORTANT THING IS, SHE NEEDED TO GO ON TO PRESENT ALL THE STRONG ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE FROM THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY TO BALANCE THAT. I also hate to hear Atheist bigots spout on in a similar way - and there are RE teachers who are atheist exclusivists with just as poisonous prejudices. I have said before, here, how in my first teaching observation I was in a class which was studying the account of 'The Last Days' of Jesus. The class was divided into groups which had to role-play a court of law in which they debated the Resurrection. The exercise was engaging and challenging. I have since done the same kind of lesson. There is nothing wrong with that approach. But the different options which the students had to debate did not include as a possibility that the resurrection actually occurred. I have seen other examples of narrow minded prejudiced teaching - but again only from those who are unable to take the spiritual side of religion seriously. (One Catholic HOD required me to teach only selected miracles, for example, and to give the 'explanation' along with them - such as the feeding of the 5000 means that everyone was inspired to share the food that they had brought. I guess that until we have decent funding with all school RE departments staffed by specialist teachers, good RE Advisers on hand and quality CPD, this kind of thing will happen - but hopefully it is quite rare. I have certainly never come across it in my own career.