The new movie "Expelled" is coming out soon and it exposes the bias that many scientists have against intelligent design. The controversy surrounding it has many talking about the fact that often Darwinism has become a religion for many people. In many ways evolution has become a substitute religion.
Nancy Pearcey writes in her book Total Truth that "Darwinism functions as the scientific support for an overarching naturalistic worldview." Today scientists usually assume that scientific investigation requires naturalism. But that was not always the case.
When the scientific revolution began (and for the next three hundred years), science and Christianity were considered to be compatible with one another. In fact, most scientists had some form of Christian faith, and they perceived the world of diversity and complexity through a theistic framework. Nancy Pearcey points out that Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, and others sought to understand the world and use their gifts to honor God and serve humanity.
By the nineteenth century, secular trends began to change their perspective. This culminated with the publication of The Origin of Species by Charles Darwin. His theory of evolution provided the needed foundation for naturalism to explain the world without God. From that point on, social commentators began to talk about the "war between science and religion."
By the twentieth century, G.K. Chesterton was warning that Darwinian evolution and naturalism was becoming the dominant "creed" in education and the other public arenas of Western culture. He said it "began with Evolution and has ended in Eugenics." Ultimately, it "is really our established Church."
Secular evolutionists may not have church services, but it is easy to see that naturalism and Darwinism have become the main pillars of a secular view of the world. Expect more and more controversy as scientists and commentators challenge the theory of evolution.
Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.
The publication of Charles Darwin's book was no more the culmination of the development of biological knowledge than Orville and Wilbur Wrights little hop across a Carolina dune was the culmination of the development and use of manned flying machines. Darwin is, like the Wrights and many other thinkers and doers, a figure to be remembered as an initiator, but when you express such revulsion for him you attribute to him things that are not his. Evolution is something to be learned, like arithmetic or history. It does not require faith and thus can never qualify as religion. Remember that every bit and parcel of the so-called conflict between science and religion is initiated in the name of religion. Religious advocates thus demonstrate that they understand neither science nor religion. Christianity, and many other religions, are based upon the concept of creation of all by a higher power, usually in the name of God in western and Christian culture. But anyone who honestly and truly believes in God as creator of universe, earth and life has to believe God also created all the processes involved, including man's capability and responsibility as the only animal capable of such activity, such as gravity, motion and biological evolution. To deride any person or concept leading to understanding of those processes is to belittle both the theological idea of creation and man's capabilities that have evolved from that original creation. There is no conflict between God and knowledge except in the imaginations of a few religiosocists. That is, advocates of religion who don't necessarily know anything about it as opposed to theologians who know about it but don't necessarily advocate it, at least not in its present form. Click here to reply to this post
GENESIS 1 IS NOT ABOUT TIME
Posted On: 01/31/08 10:19:05 AM
Age 64, OH
God was all that was in the beginning and God created all that there is. Every letter of the Holy Scriptures are true. But so many Bible believers want to make the focus of Genesis 1 about time in a earth centered creation instead of the redeeming power of the Lord Jesus Christ in a God centered creation. The source of this philosophy is Aristotle who was a heathen. The pope decided that Aristotle was right in his earth centered universe and killed those who disagreed. It was men who sought God on this issue such as Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton that were given grace from God to see that the pope was not correct. The solar system was not earth centered but sun centered. Eventually the pope acted as he had never been wrong and agreed that the sun was at the center of the solar system, but kept the time centered part of the creation and the reformation followed in this error. The whole interpretation of most Bible believers is not God or scripture centered but time and earth centered. They say the earth was created first before the sun cast the light of God upon it. But God is light and how could there be any life without God. They say the whole creation was centered around time and not eternity. BUT WHAT DOES THE SCRIPTURES SAY. We can believe the scriptures. IN THE BEGINNING GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH. Notice that the heavens were 1st and then the earth. Look up in the heavens and you see the Sun. Is it not part of the heavens and so it says in Gen 1:1 that it was created before the earth for the stars were created first and the Sun is a star. Does not the whole Bible tell us to take a ETERNAL point of view and not to take a temporal(time) point of view. The focus point of the creation is NOT TIME. The focus point of the creation IS the redeeming power of the Lord Jesus Christ. Where is the redeeming power of Jesus in their interpretation. 1 John tells us that any message that does not tell of the redeeming power of Christ is from the anti-Christ. But dear friend look at the redemption of Jesus Christ in the truth. FIRST ACT OF CREATION THE PHYSICAL 1- There was nothing and Jesus created all. 2- there was darkness and Jesus said let there be light.This was when the sun came on or nuclear fission started 3-the material for the earth was created but it was formless but Jesus caused the earth to form 4-there was no atmosphere to breath so Jesus caused the earth to make the air. 5-there was no land only the seas so Jesus caused the land to form for us. 6-there were no plants to feed life so Jesus said let the earth bring forth plants. They brought forth plants after their kind. Those kind are still being brought forth today. The kind that need the light of the Sun to live. This is to show us that we need the light of God to live and not die. 7-the Sun and moon could not be seen from the earth because of all the thick atmosphere so Jesus said let then appear and the air got clear so they could be seen. The light had been coming through for the plants but Jesus wanted everything with eyes to be able to see the Sun and the Moon for very important reasons. This all sprang from the first act of creation of the Lord. SECOND ACT OF CREATION THE SOUL- 1-This does not say, let there be, but God created again. Jesus CREATED the great sea creatures and the birds 2-there was no life on land so Jesus said LET THE LAND PRODUCE LIVING CREATURES. - THIRD ACT OF CREATION THE SPIRIT - So Jesus breathed the breath of life (or the spirit)into he man. -- It is all about how the Lord Jesus made a place for us and created us in His image NOT TIME. This wrong interpretation of scripture does not agree with what God has shown in the creation he created and so men think that creation and scripture disagree. But God said the heavens declare the glory of God and they do. Scripture and the creation agree because they both have the same author. Lou Click here to reply to this post
Not all posts are obvious but some require a little thought. The whole argument between evolution and much of the church has become focused on the six days of Genesis 1. They argue that if a person has faith that they should be able to believe that the earth was created in six earth days. They imply that if someone would see a different interpretation in scripture that it is a lack of faith. My post speaks for itself and shows that Genesis 1 is NOT about time at all. To focus on six 24 hour days is to focus on time which we are told NOT to do. We are to have an eternal point of view not temporal. Read my post and it will answer your questions. By the way who made you the post police. Lou Click here to reply to this post
Hmmmm....
Posted On: 02/01/08 06:09:22 PM
Age 19, MN
I was unsure what you were getting at, that's all. Yes, the debate often centers around the days of the earth (which you and I have debated on before), but the ID movement actually is not the same thing as 6-day creationism (they don't necessarily agree on the issue of the earth's age and six days in fact). As far as your statement of me being "post police"...where did you get that idea in the first place? And if you are meaning as a joke, it really came out flat and a bit unkind Lou. Whatever the case, you have a great day and God Bless! :D Click here to reply to this post
QUESTIONS
Posted On: 02/06/08 03:07:23 PM
Age 64, OH
I did not mean to be unkind, dear friend. I was simply trying to ask you questions to get you to think because you seem to be intelligent and I did not think you were living up to your ability. When I see a post that I am not sure about I try to think on it for a day or two and then I come back and see that my view of it has often changed. Lou Click here to reply to this post
The claim that "Darwinism has become a religion for many people" is one I've read many times. But I have never seen any serious attempt to show how anybody who has written about or worked on evolutionary biology behaves like a "religious believer" in their "creed." All such claims seem to come down to two basic observations: 1) Many people think they are right when they say evolution is a fact, and 2) they often argue aggressively against people who say they are wrong. So what exactly counts as a "religious" practice or attitude? Click here to reply to this post
Ham:
'Webster’s Dictionary defines religion as follows: “Cause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” Surely, this is an apt description of evolution. Evolution is a belief system—a religion! It only takes common sense to understand that one does not dig up an “age of the dinosaurs” supposedly existing 70–200 million years ago. One digs up dead dinosaurs that exist now, not millions of years ago.'
Thus, according to Ham, evolution is a religion because it involves "faith," and it involves faith because it makes claims about events in the past which the biologist did not observe. This is absurd because it assumes that there is no such thing as reasonable inference about the past. If some inferences are reasonable and others are not, it does not require faith (in the usual sense of the word) to choose one. The evidence collected by criminologists does not come labeled "trace left by murderer three months ago," so are their conclusions also examples of "religious faith"? (DNAism?) Or, since nobody can see the future, and so nobody knows what the economy will look like five years from now, does that mean that anybody who buys stock in General Motors is practicing the religion of Automotivism? Click here to reply to this post
But that's the point...
Posted On: 02/01/08 05:56:18 PM
Age 19, MN
...evolution has assumptions, just like Christianity. The question is which is the most reasonable faith. I suggest searching the website for their use of the same evidence...which it does happen to be...and see for yourself which side is more reasonable. Click here to reply to this post
Woodrow Kroll, David Jeremiah,Sean McDowell, Josh McDowell, David Barton, Carl Kerby, Frank Harber, Kerby Anderson, and the Branson Family Reunion DVD Set! This is a $74.95 value for only $34.95! FREE worksheet with purchase!
Russell O'Quinn, Steve Saint, Dr. Michael Youssef, Dr. Erwin Lutzer, Bob Lepine, Star Parker, Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort, and the Branson Family Reunion DVD Set! This is a $74.95 value for only $34.95!
