The Bible and Society

How God’s Word is True

The Faith of the Evolutionist

Posted by Mats on 09/01/2009

Hebrews 11:3
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

Many people think that faith is strictly a religious matter and concerns unprovable issues such as angels, heaven and, of course, belief in the creation story. They further feel that belief in evolution is more reasonable, since it is based upon hard and proven facts. But is this true?

Faith is what we add to the evidences we have in order to provide our worldview. The less evidence there is, the more faith we need. Evolutionary scientists often admit that they, too, interpret the world in the context of their faith. Their faith is that everything and everyone got here by means of evolution.

Prof. L. H. Matthews, a well recognized evolutionist, was honored by being asked to write a new introduction for the 1971 edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species. In his introduction – speaking of evolution – he admitted, “Most biologists accept it as though it were a proven fact, … although this conviction rests upon circumstantial evidence, it forms a satisfactory faith on which to base our interpretation of nature.”

You see, this is nothing more than what Bible believing Christians do when they understand the world in the context of their faith. As Christians, we should not be intimidated into thinking that the faith of the evolutionist is somehow superior to ours for understanding the world!
Prayer: Lord; the devil is not called the “Accuser” for nothing. He even tries to make the faith You have given me into a sin! Rather than being intimidated because I believe Your Word, I ask that You would give me a bold faith which does not shrink from speaking Your truth in love. Amen.
Visit Web Site | Donate | Catalog | Subscribe | Unsubscribe
©2008 Creation Moments, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Call us at 1-800-422-4253

Web Design by August Ash, Inc.

Advertisements

8 Responses to “The Faith of the Evolutionist”

  1. There’s no such thing as “faith” as you describe it in science. Scientists don’t have faith an experiment will turn out how they want. Scientists don’t have faith a certain gene leads to a disease.

    The whole point of science is to be objective, and to mean the same thing to any observer. Of course opinions differ on the bleeding edge of research – it couldn’t work any other way (if everyone had the same opinion there’d only be one attainable final conclusion, right or wrong). but the majority of science is the bulk of irrefutable knowledge built up over hundreds of years. As for evolution, it’s not something that can’t technically be wrong (and would be easy to disprove, if it could be), but it’s certainly not something that’s anywhere near likely to be wrong, the evidence for it now is so vast and compelling, and there’s no other theory to explain the diversity of life that comes close to to it.

    If you haven’t studied evolution, you’ll probably be unaware of the other competing theories that were disproved over the years as knowledge improved. Lamarckism, as an example ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarkism ). Darwinian evolution may look like a faith as it is the only view taken seriously now, but there’s nothing pious about that – the controversies are historical now.

    Faith in God is totally different. It can mean to you whatever you want, or whatever someone else wants. There’s no real evidence to believe in a God or Gods, that’s what makes it faith.

    Find real evidence against evolution and scientists will find it fascinating, find evidence against God (if it were possible) and your faith would just grow stronger.

  2. Mats said

    ArrogantScientist:

    There’s no such thing as “faith” as you describe it in science. Scientists don’t have faith an experiment will turn out how they want. Scientists don’t have faith a certain gene leads to a disease.

    But the article doesn’t aim at “scientists” but evolutionists. Why are you conflating the two?

    As for evolution, it’s not something that can’t technically be wrong (and would be easy to disprove, if it could be), but it’s certainly not something that’s anywhere near likely to be wrong, the evidence for it now is so vast and compelling, and there’s no other theory to explain the diversity of life that comes close to to it.

    Sure there is. Intelligent Design. Given the machine-like structure of biological systems, ascribing such sophistication to unguided forces is totally illogical.

    Darwinian evolution may look like a faith as it is the only view taken seriously now, but there’s nothing pious about that – the controversies are historical now.

    It’s the only view taken seriously by evolutionists, yes.

    Faith in God is totally different. It can mean to you whatever you want, or whatever someone else wants. There’s no real evidence to believe in a God or Gods, that’s what makes it faith.

    If we ignore the machine-like structure of the living world, the design in the cosmos, the moral law within humans, yes, then “there is no real evidence”.

    Find real evidence against evolution and scientists will find it fascinating,

    Find real evidence for evolution and scientists will find it fascinating.

    find evidence against God (if it were possible) and your faith would just grow stronger.

    huh?!!

  3. So evolutionists aren’t scientists? Or are you referring to normal people that accept evolution? Understanding that science is a logical process with a proven track record doesn’t amount to faith.

    Sorry to be blunt, but saying nature has “machine-like structure” is ignorant, and intelligent design is not comparable to evolution. Intelligent Design is a means to an end – it’s based on the premise that there is/was an intelligent designer, and it looks to find evidence to try to prove it (it’s not scientific). Evolution is a scientific theory based on mountains evidence, it doesn’t matter where the evidence takes it. To deny there is evidence for evolution is frankly bizarre.

  4. Mats said

    Yes, evolutionists can be scientists, but not all scientists are evolutionists.

    Secondly, my arguement is nto against science but against evolution. Therefore, when you defende “science” while I criticize evolution you are not really dealing with the issues.

  5. Evolution is science. Argue against evolution and you’re arguing against the process that went into creating the theory. The process that went into creating other accepted paradigms is the same process that created the theory of evolution. You can’t argue against the scientific process for one topic because you don’t like it, yet accept it for others (i.e gravity, germ theory etc.).

  6. Mats said

    Evolution is science. Argue against evolution and you’re arguing against the process that went into creating the theory.

    Evolution didn’t came into existence the same way that other theories came into existence. Evolution is science for those who believe in evolution.

    The process that went into creating other accepted paradigms is the same process that created the theory of evolution.

    Not really. Newton’s laws and Einstein’s theories didn’t assume the things that evolution assumes.

    You can’t argue against the scientific process for one topic because you don’t like it, yet accept it for others (i.e gravity, germ theory etc.).

    But I am not arguing against a scientic topic. I am arguing against evolution.

  7. So you don’t think evolution is a science? That doesn’t form a very good basis for an argument, as it’s flat-out wrong. It reveals your extreme bias and [potentially willful] ignorance.

  8. Mats said

    So you don’t think evolution is a science?

    I thought that was obvious.

    That doesn’t form a very good basis for an argument, as it’s flat-out wrong.

    Show me where it is wrong. Shouldn’t a scientific theory have evidence? Where is the evolutionary evidence? Mutations and natural selection are not creative forces, so your mechanism is insuficient,m as many scientists say.

    It reveals your extreme bias and [potentially willful] ignorance.

    I am bias because I don’t believe that the living world created itself?

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: