Evolution is a religion

image

From the atheist philosopher of science Michael Ruse. “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”

Ruse, M., How evolution became a religion: creationists correct? National Post, pp. B1,B3,B7 May 13, 2000.

Webster defines “religion” as “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith”. Christianity falls into this category. So do the hundreds of false religions that have plagued mankind for millennia. Matthew 7:13-14 indicates that the majority of people will be deceived. Despite the overwhelming evidence God has given, they will choose to create their own religion, or adhere to a false religion promoted by their society.

A famous event occurred nearly 3,000 years ago, when Elijah found himself confronting 450 prophets of Baal and 400 prophets of Ashera. Those false prophets ate at the queen’s table (1 Kings 18:19), indicating that they were among the most respected and trusted people in society. Although they obviously were wrong, their position and power had so influenced the people that when Elijah stated “If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, follow him,” “the people answered him not” (1 Kings 18:21). Many (if not most) of the people undoubtedly knew that Baal had come from the imagination of men. However, the fact that so many “important” individuals in their society promoted Baal either caused them to doubt God, or intimidated them to the point that they were unwilling to stand firm for God.

A similar situation exists today. Concerted efforts to indoctrinate people into believing evolution have been ongoing for decades. However, polls continually show that the majority of Americans believe in God, and believe that He created the Universe and life.

While that is good news, the promotion of evolution by many “important” people in our society likely has caused many of those polled either to doubt God, or be intimidated to the point that they are unwilling to stand firm for God.

This is the main reason it is important to realize that evolution is simply another false religion, and that the temptation people face when confronted with that religion is nothing new.

*Michael Ruse was professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph, Canada. He was the leading anti-creationist philosopher whose arguments seemed to convince the biased judge to rule against the Arkansas ‘balanced treatment’ (of creation and evolution in schools) bill in 1981/2.



Categories: Apologetics, Christianity

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

48 replies

    • Religion may be defined as a cultural system of designated behaviours and practices, worldviews, texts, sanctified places, prophecies, ethics, or organizations, that relates humanity to supernatural, transcendental, or spiritual elements. Wikipedia
      Definition of religion the state of a religious, a nun in her 20th year of religion, the service and worship of God or the supernatural, commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance. Merriam-Webster
      Someone may religiously go to the shop on a Monday morning or an atheist may religiously be an atheist, but it does not mean that shopping or atheism is a religion. Thought you smart Christians would understand English by now.
      Do you Christians always make up stuff to give yourselves credibility?

      Like

      • “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”

        Like

        • I was addressing atheism if you did not notice.
          “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”
          What silly nonsense, evolution is a world view or maybe an ideological position, however read the definition of religion because it does not fit, it does not have supernatural beliefs or worship of gods or things.
          Surely you and Wally do not disbelieve the dictionary and have the decency to show some honesty when something is so dammed obvious.

          Like

  1. I wish Steve would quit saying he can practice atheism religiously on one clause of a sentence, then deny it is a religion in the very same sentence. Of course, arguments like that do prove the complete and utter voidness and incoherence of the atheist worldview. I suppose we owe him for that. Such convoluted statements make my fundy head hurt.

    Like

    • The only reason I let Steve and Nan post here is because their comments are so nonsensical they can’t help but to give people the impression that disbelief is completely devoid of logic.

      Sadly, Steve fancies himself an intellectual titan who is infinately smarter than us backwards Christian rubes.

      Like

    • Being an American who thinks he knows it all Wally, I should of understood you could never understand the refinements of the English language.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Steve. My English is just fine. I don’t think I know it all. But I do know that if you pursue something religiously it is, by definition, a religion. Now, perhaps for the first time in your life, instead of using MY stupidity as an argument, why don’t you defend your statement. If pursing something religiously doesn’t make it a religion, then we all await your cogent explanation of what you meant. Oh….also, is it only “true” athiests(as you have claimed to be while turning your nose up at what I assume are lightweight atheists), who pursue atheism religiously? Or can all pursue your non-religion religiously like you do?

        So, defend your statement. I will even concede that I am nothing but a stupid, American, Christian know it all. See? That is off the table now, so all that remains is for you to explain how one follows something religiously without it being a religion.

        We eagerly await your answer, Oh man of much faith.

        Like

        • The dictionary could be wrong, and could it be an atheist conspiracy against Christianity?

          You must have never heard the term, “he religiously reads the morning paper” or “he practices religiously for four hours every day.” Religiously can also mean something to do with religion such as “the religiously based school” however in this situation it means with consistent and conscientious regularity.

          If you do something religiously, you do it regularly as per the English dictionary.

          https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/religiously

          By the way Wally,
          “It’s should HAVE understood” “Not should of understood” I concede here, but at least I do understand what words mean.

          Like

          • You practice, preach and promote the beliefs of militant atheism religiously. You are far more religious than me.
            Keep on trucking

            Like

              • I expect this. Not your fault you are indoctrinated into a cult that does not allow you to be truthful and honest when mistaken and your pride has been hurt.

                Like

                • I came to faith at 30 and hadn’t darkened the door of a church in 10 years. Also went to church only a handful of times my entire childhood. So, how was I indoctrinated, exactly?

                  If you are going to make a claim that I was indoctrinated, you need to back that up with facts, otherwise it’s a baseless and profoundly ignorant claim.

                  Like

                  • The indoctrination process is more straight forward when the person is youngish, unworldly and unwise regarding their options in life. If the individual has had some past experiences in life regarding a religion and had some thoughts about its credibility, discussed it with others and may have lived within a society of people who were theists it can be an easier transition.
                    For example, the handful of times you went into that church when you were young and impressionable something would have had some positive impact that was retained within your sub-conscious mind even though consciously you may have rejected the ideology at the time. The fact that you went to a church after 10 years confirms your subconscious awakened that thought and even if a friend persuaded you or some other conscious reason convinced you to attend it means you were subconsciously primed and prompted to eventually end up going to the church again.
                    Your subconscious mind is a huge memory that permanently stores everything, and most of it you are never aware of. Its function is to receive and retrieve data. Your subconscious mind is subjective and does not work independently and is triggered by the thoughts from your conscious mind. This is another reason why harnessing the power of positive thinking is important to the foundation of the entire thought process.
                    There are literally hundreds of web pages and videos that go into detail about the subconscious mind. Many of them vary in their approach however the basic fundamentals are much the same.

                    Like

                    • Oh Steve, bless your heart.

                      The handful of times I went to church as a child, it was Catholic Mass an it did nothing for me.

                      When I entered the AF at 19, I went to chuch a couple times in Basic Training because it was either that or clean the barracks and it did nothing for me. The last time I recall going was Easter about 10 years before I was saved. I went because I was invited, my family was out of town, and I had no other plans on a holiday. Again, I got nothing out of it. And, despite what you’ve implied without evidence supporting evidence, there was no subconscious awakening.

                      I accepted Christ after a few conversations with a friend at work. No brainwashing, no indoctrination, no hypnosis…

                      Look, I know indoctrination HAS to be a factor for you because the mere idea that a grown intelligent person can accept Christ without some kind of trickery undermines your narrative but that is exactly what happens a good deal of the time.

                      Like

                  • I would also comment that if two grown intelligent men such as Wally and yourself cannot bring yourselves to believe in a dictionary definition because it does not suit you, it tells me that you will not be able to differentiate between facts and fiction anyway regardless of what the subject may be, and just highlights the mind altering results of indoctrination.

                    Like

                  • James, we can’t possibly have a clear understanding of the things that happened in our own lives? Allow Steve to help you come to an understanding of what happened to YOU. It’s not like you were the one actually there or anything. Of course, anybody knows the testimony of a stupid Christian is well…stupid. On the other hand, we must believe and worship at the altar of the doconverted, because THEIR experiences are real and valid.

                    Like

                    • It has been my experience that atheists do not believe people can come to faith unless there is some sort of emotional trauma or indoctrination of some kind which is not true.

                      What Steve is doing here, I think, is saying that there is something (indoctrination, trauma, past experience) that is the root cause of my conversion. This I can’t possibly know, of course, because it is all subconscious.

                      Like

                    • Of course it’s not true James. You asked a great question, though, when you asked for facts to support the assertion that you were indoctrinated. I have asked the same. Names, dates and so forth of when this occurred. The best answer was that, because I was “raised with Christanity” that I was indoctrinated. Then, when I reminded the person that I had certainly not been raised in a Christian home, they said it was because I had Christian kinfolk. Then, when I pointed out that those folks got me in church maybe once year, it was because I lived in the Bible Belt. Then when I pointed out that I spent most of my adult life outside the Bible Belt, then they muttered something about TV and slobbered on themselves.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • None of it makes sense to me Wally, none of it. Yeah, I know indoctrination exists, the Nazis did it, cults do it, and even some churches do it. But, indoctrination is not part of mainstream Christianity and never has been.

                      As I said, I was 30 and had no particular interest in God, church, salvation, the Bible…

                      My conversion process started with a coworker simply presenting the Gospel. I thought about what he said and came to faith on my own time, in my house, without setting foot in a church, taking a class, or talking to a pastor.

                      Although he would never admit it, I think Steve and I are on the same page (kind of) when it comes to our subconscious. I do think their is a prodding for us to come to faith but it isn’t (as Steve says) the subconscious but the Holy Spirit.

                      Again, atheists just can’t believe smart, reasonable, and basically well-adjusted people can make a conscious choice to come to faith without something nefarious being behind it.

                      Weird how people cannot control coming to faith but they can read a blog post or watch a YouTube video and be in total control of their deconversion.

                      Like

                    • I guess if you are really smart, you can seize control of your subconcious, but the rest of us are just drivin by it, James.

                      Like

                    • Yep, that’s Steve’s argument. Christians are ignorant and gullible, atheists are not.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    • I never did expect you guys to understand and I knew I would get such anti-scientific and mind numbing replies.
                      Anyway, not a problem so keep worshipping and praying for us poor atheists.

                      Like

                    • And I never did expect you to give me, or any other Christian for that matter, any credit for being the least bit informed about how the conscious and unconscious minds work. You know, us being anti-science rubes and all.

                      Anyway, have you ever heard the term psychotheology before? If you haven’t in the extensive research you have done, here you go.

                      The term psychotheology is an adaptation of a theory from Sigmund Freud called “psychopathology” in which he suggests that our unconscious mind can influence our daily life by manifesting itself in dreams, forgetfulness, slips of the tongue, or various other behaviors. In psychopathology, the psychological creates the pathology. Similarly, psychotheology claims that the psychological creates, or strongly influences, theology. In its extreme, this can attempt to relegate God to a mere figment of the imagination. 

                      Psychotheology suggests that we can learn to control our subconscious urges and feelings toward the existence of a deity, especially one who punishes sin and causes anxiety in the sinner, and only allow those emotions that renew and refresh, rather than overwhelm and destroy. In doing so, we can learn to modify nearly everything to suit our needs, regardless of truth or reality. This idea would suggest that belief in God, celebrating holidays, or other activities that bring us joy are nothing more than manifestations of our subconscious, designed to create emotions but no real attachment. An example of this would be the observation that our society has so dulled and softened the role of Christ in the Christmas holiday that even a non-Christian feels free to celebrate it without the slightest hint of religious undertones or commitment to God. We get all of the benefit, but don’t need to ascribe to any beliefs to do so.

                      But God is not a creation of man to provide us feelings of joy; it is the other way around. This idea that we are the authors of our own joy, and ultimately our destiny, is completely counter to the biblical message, which states that all things are created by God and for God (Colossians 1:16). A philosophy like psychotheology attempts to explain away God’s influence but really accomplishes nothing more than providing a definition of the plan of Satan to mute our perception of God’s sovereignty and ultimate rule over our lives. “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ” (Colossians 2:8).

                      Like

      • Oh and as long as proper English matters so much.

        It’s should HAVE understood

        Not should of understood

        Sheesh

        Like

  2. “despite what you’ve implied without evidence supporting evidence, there was no subconscious awakening.”
    You may not remember the details of everything when you were a young guy visiting church James, but it doesn’t mean that deep inside your subconscious mind that every little detail has not been recorded and it will continue to influence the person you were and will become in the future.
    The subconscious will always impact on your conscious mind and the conversion for you was easy as you consciously accepted the Christian doctrine through many reasons and possibly strong emotional feelings also helped lead you there.
    I also had to attend Sunday school and church camps when young including compulsory church services in the military, not to mention many funerals weddings and baptisms since then, however my subconscious will have recorded differently to yours.
    As you claim a few conversations were enough to sway you consciously to dive headlong into a religious life changing ideology I can only surmise that your subconscious would have had some part to play in such a sudden commitment, however I agree that conversion for you was straight forward and submissive, therefore indoctrination was not an issue.
    “the mere idea that a grown intelligent person can accept Christ without some kind of trickery”
    The subconscious mind is a factor in all decisions, including those of an atheist. No “trickery,” If you need evidence about the subconscious mind there are plenty of web sites that can assist you in finding it and some web sites that can even tell you how you can learn to have some control over your subconscious.

    Like

    • Assuming you’re right here Steve (you’re not), how ca you say with certainty that your subconscious has been affected the same way mine has and you just haven’t realized it yet? Could you, for the sake of argument, be a day away from accepting Christ as your savior?

      You also said “no trickery” which is interesting because isn’t the indoctrination you claim must take place in a conversion almost exclusively trickery of some kind?

      And. What is the root cause of this subconscious acceptance of faith by some and rejection by others? Mental defect?

      Finally. If religious conversion is rooted in a subconscious mind that no one can regulate or control then evidence, science, and reason really have nothing to do with it, right?

      Like

      • “Assuming you’re right here Steve (you’re not),”
        James, are you saying this is not right scientifically or is this because it does not conform to your ideology?
        “Contrary to what most of us would like to believe, decision-making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity. A team of scientists has unravelled how the brain actually unconsciously prepares our decisions. “Many processes in the brain occur automatically and without involvement of our consciousness. This prevents our mind from being overloaded by simple routine tasks. But when it comes to decisions we tend to assume they are made by our conscious mind. This is questioned by our current findings.” (science daily)
        “how ca you say with certainty that your subconscious has been affected the same way mine has and you just haven’t realized it yet?”
        Good question, the fact is that we both have had different influences and experiences in our lives regarding many things including religions. I think if I had consciously showed some serious interest in religions and my subconsciousness had something emotional to offer in regard to a previous positive religious influence it would have directed me down that path, however it does seem I have been influenced in the opposite direction.
        “because isn’t the indoctrination you claim must take place in a conversion almost exclusively trickery of some kind?”
        Technically I guess you would be correct. A high level of Indoctrination is about tricking the mind into unquestionable belief, or better explained as mind manipulation. Communists did it and still do, Hitler’s Nazi party did it and to a far lesser extent we are all being tricked into political ideals including the many subliminal and passive examples of thought manipulation such as repetitious advertising and unfounded public statements and so on, probably better described as con jobs.
        “And. What is the root cause of this subconscious acceptance of faith by some and rejection by others? Mental defect?”
        Nothing like that, from what I understand something consciously may trigger the underlying information within the subconscious to influence your belief and decisions. For example, many people who deconvert from religions often have something that starts pricking at their conscience. It may have been just one small issue that the subconscious has stored many years before and has pushed into the conscious mind and is often nagging for many years and not resolved eventually leading the theist into pretence or eventually into unbeliever or atheist status. The same for religious converts, I believe many unbelievers are never comfortable with a non-religious status and the subconscious would eventually drive the conscious mind to decide to become a theist.
        “Finally. If religious conversion is rooted in a subconscious mind that no one can regulate or control then evidence, science, and reason really have nothing to do with it, right?”
        Not really true because what you do and become is dependent on what is stored within your subconscious mind. We all have different backgrounds, parents, traditions, morals and emotional experiences etc that are recorded in great detail. Having said this, I believe any decision a person my make due to influence from the subconscious can consciously be overturned, changed or modified due also to more recent or conflicting knowledge.
        There are many techniques highlighted on web pages and YouTube of how to control your subconscious mind. When you meditate and use positive thinking techniques, these are in effect a way to manipulate your own mind to assist in life and decision making. I do believe religious ideals can also be a capable method of changing your brain for the positive, however these benefits can be obtained without the baggage and superfluous issues that surround such ideologies.

        Like

        • OK Steve, let me boil this down into a few easier to digest bullets to make sure I understand you correctly, OK?

          – Decision making may be a process handled to a large extent by unconscious mental activity

          – Many processes in the brain occur automatically and without conscious involvement in order to prevent our brains from being overloaded by simple routine tasks

          – That decisions are made consciously is merely questioned, not refuted, by the study you cited

          – You think that if you showed some serious interest in religion you may have been directed down a different path

          – People either come to faith or reject faith due to large amounts of information stored in a subconscious they have no control over

          – The subconscious decisions people have no control over can be overturned consciously

          – Nagging in the subconscious mind cause people to make conscious decisions to accept or reject faith

          – Nagging subconscious feelings that lead people to make decisions they can’t control can be consciously overturned

          Am I wrong anywhere here? These are your thoughts in a nutshell, right?

          If this is accurate, there seem to be some glaring contradictions and unfounded assumptions made on your part.

          Like

          • The doctors, neuroscientists and medical scientists etc will all have different variations on how much influence the subconscious mind has on your life’s decisions. One thing they do basically agree on is that the function of your subconscious mind is to store, access and retrieve data.

            The idea of deeper levels of information processing was developed and extensively studied by famous Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud (1856 – 1939) who introduced the 3 level mind model.

            Conscious – defines all thoughts and actions within our awareness.

            Subconscious – defines all reactions and automatic actions we can become aware of if we think about them.

            Unconscious – defines all past events and memories, inaccessible to us no matter how hard we try to remember to bring things up.

            Modern brain imaging research has fully supported Freud’s model of the mind. It is suggested that the depth of thought depends on its processing pathway. Studies have showed that the pathways of conscious and unconscious thoughts can be clearly differentiated.

            subconscious has been referred to as motivation as occurring without intention, awareness, and conscious guidance. The logic of these two minds is that if it worked in the past and you survived, then it will help you get through similar situations by the same means, no matter how misguided, painful, and unhelpful the results may be to you personally in the outside world.

            The subconscious decisions people have no control over that influence our immediate conscious judgments or decisions can be overturned consciously.

            For example, if your subconscious mind prompted an emotional impression as a child regarding a particular person you met but did not trust, and if you met this person again 50 years later you would be concerned. However, you could consciously make a decision to re-evaluate this person as it appears from this second meeting your childhood fears may have been wrong. Having said this, of course the argument is that this decision to re-evaluate may also have had roots within your subconscious mind to also influence this decision.

            I have pointed out an atheist can consciously decide to become a theist due to some sensitive event or detail that would have been influenced by the subconscious, however after 20 or 30 years of religious study he decides to again become an atheist. This also will be driven by some sensitive or emotional incident, detail or aspect of dislike and stored in the subconscious and has been recalled by conscious events and thought processes.

            Like

  3. You do know that sklyjd only comments here so he can then go over to Ark’s blog and brag about his comments here so Ark will pat him on the head and tell him what a great job he is doing?

    Like

    • Well at least I do not have a Wally type of sniper in the background who often discusses with you what is claimed as inaccuracies and failures. All is fair, is it not?

      Like

      • I can’t say what’s fair or what’s not fair to you Steve. As far as what the commentor said about Ark’s blog, meh, I don’t care. I haven’t read Ark’s blog in a long time so I can’t really speak to what goes on there.

        However, juvenile idiocy used to be common and I can’t imagine that’s changed.

        Like

        • Apologies, I should have replied to this Anonymous who obviously reads both blogs. Our comments it should be noted are justified, and I do not mean this in a nasty way. I mean you have to admit that ignoring dictionary definitions and trying to fit your ideology into the realities of what is an extraordinarily advancing scientific world is such a difficult and an unreasonably practicable undertaking you are always going to be compromising the idealistic perceptions you have and the core beliefs you have of your faith.

          Like

          • Your comments are justified by who?
            Who gave you the right to comment as you see fit anywhere you chose?
            Seriously, who died and made you arbiter of truth online?
            The gross and negligent abuse of dictionary definitions you seem to be up in arms about didn’t start with Wally or me. It was a word for word quote from a well known atheist philosopher. In other words, someone who shares your worldview. Have you called him out on his error? I’m sure someone as proficient at Google as you are should be able to easily find his email.
            Really, Steve, if you believe you have a moral obligation to stamp out internet disinformation, why not start at the source?
            I understand you claim to love science and what not but, let’s be honest. You are an average guy with an average level of education, who has had an average career not doing science. I know you are super proud of your science chops (as is every atheist blogger) but reading some web pages and watching YouTube doesn’t make you any more of a scientist than Bill Nye.
            Even if you did have a mandate or moral obligation of some kind to wage a war on religion online, I would say you are failing spectacularly in doing so. Look, Steve, you own a blog no one reads, post dopey comments on a handful of small time Christian blogs, and make fun of Mel and Wally. And none of those things does anything at all to either advance atheism or diminish religion. In fact, all it does is make you look like an anti-theist tool who just hates religion.

            Like

      • Sniper? Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha!! That’s funny stuff, Steve. Look, this is easy. If you don’t want to get called out on inaccuracies, redundancies, and flat-out contradictions(often all in the same sentence,) then quit saying nonsensical stuff. I know you think Christians are stupid and delusional, but at least we have a source for what we believe(That being the Bible, of course.) You on the other hand, just pull stuff out of your head(most likely from your subconscious, I suppose.) And seriously? The best response you can come up with when engaging another commenter is to mock me? I am actually quite honored by that, and appreciate the rent free space you have given me in your head.

        On a serious note. Serious for you my friend. Obviously, you have not and will not EVER convince any person on this blog to reconsider their faith. Ever. Why are you here then? Well. I will take a swag at that answer. Because. You. Know. You know you are wrong, Steve. You know God exists, you know He sits in judgment you in the not so distant future most likely. What you don’t know, because you don’t listen, is that the path to peace is right in front of you. You have this totally off-base notion about how Christians make peace with God by following rules and obeying a bunch of commands. Wrong. Jesus, that’s it. Go read my Jesus Paid it All Series…read it, Steve, don’t just pile up a bunch of stupid comments about kids, and guns, and other crap that has nothing to do with YOU. That’s who you need to be worried about. God is perfectly just and those folks are in His hands one way or another. YOU, Steve. Read it “Jesus Paid it All.” I am tired of arguing with you and getting hammered with stupid. The only reason I have put up with your stupid this long is..new flash….my deep an abiding love for you and my heart that aches over your rejection. Steve, do you know that I pray for you daily, by name.

        Peace.

        Like

        • “That’s funny stuff, Steve.”

          Oh, thank you Wally, on my way to a new career then.

          “If you don’t want to get called out on inaccuracies, redundancies, and flat-out contradictions (often all in the same sentence,) then quit saying nonsensical stuff.”

          The stuff you mention is basically supported by much of the scientific community, whereas you have no scientific evidence to dispute it. It is really that simple and I am not going to go on about it because you always scurry back to your Bible when the going gets tough.

          “I know you think Christians are stupid and delusional,”

          Of course, you can read my mind Wally and you would know I have never called anyone stupid, even though you have fired it a few times. Delusion, I do believe that is the situation and unfortunately it appears to be terminal but there is always some hope.

          “my deep an abiding love for you and my heart that aches over your rejection. Steve, do you know that I pray for you daily, by name.”

          I am flattered and I have hope and love for you too, but what changed your mind about me? Do you now understand atheists better than before and realise we are just as moral as you are and should not be slaughtered like your Bible suggests?

          Like

          • “Do you now understand atheists better than before and realise we are just as moral as you are and should not be slaughtered like your Bible suggests?”
            See? That right there is the problem. Problem one, you don’t understand the Bible because you have never studied it. Problem two. I have never even suggested such a thing. That makes you a liar.
            Do you hear that sound, Steve? That is me knocking the dust off of my feet and leaving you to your own desires. Run and get your treat and pat on the head from you atheist handlers now. I am done with you.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. I have finally read this lengthy thread with a mixed sense of humor and horror. I see misunderstanding, misinformation, and a tragic us-verses-them antagonism that is so typical in the “Divided States” these days. First I will confess that I have been a Bible-believing Christian for the last four decades (and still am).
    Let’s be honest. Using the scientific method, no one can prove or disprove the existence of God. If science is the only tool in your toolbox, you will miss out on a wide array of truth in this world. The scientific method is rarely used in courtrooms, and yet many things are proved and disproved many times a day. Perhaps the main question is this: what type of evidence is permissible? If your answer is scientific evidence, well then, that is pretty self-limiting… tunnel vision. Yet, in many dimensions (God, for one), this is the default mentality of modern man.
    What I understand is this: “Evolution” is a biological explanation of how species were developed and still adapt. The main issue at hand is that of “Materialism” (there is nothing immaterial other than ideas) which is logical result of “Atheism” (God does not exist) which requires “Naturalism” (there is no such thing as the supernatural) and evolution is the only plausible explanation of creation without God. All three of these “–isms” (being erroneously defined in this post as “Evolution”) have typically been followed with a religious fervor that meets or exceeds that of any true “religion.” I think that observation is where the title of this post originates.
    Here are couple links to my blog that will explain more than I have room for here.
    This one is for fellow Christians and other Bible-believers to consider:
    https://dbsuch.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/on-the-elasticity-of-time-and-genesis-chapter-one/
    These two are for skeptical atheists to consider:
    https://dbsuch.wordpress.com/2016/04/29/wish-fulfillment/
    https://dbsuch.wordpress.com/2017/06/15/mice-in-the-piano/

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: