If evolution is true, then faith must abound for all creation beliefs.
It’s time for people of good will and right reason to gracefully but firmly call out the charade. The charade is this longsuffering public posture of polite deference to those among us who demand dogmatic belief in evolution, as if evolution does not require faith.
Here’s the party line on creation according to evolution and creation according to the Bible: One is science. The other is religion. We are told. One is supported by reason, the other is supported by faith. We are told. One is open to questioning in search of real truth. The other dogmatically presents a version of truth. We are told.
Which is which when it comes to evolution? Has evolution risen to the level of a strange new hybrid characterized by scientific dogmatism? The answer is evident any time the claims of evolutionary processes are questioned. Try it and see.
Dogmatism has its place in religion. In fact, dogmatism is expected in religion.
Dogmatism in any form is evidence of a faith belief about the world around us.
Religious dogmatism, when wielded over others forces an intolerant subservience to faith beliefs not held by many. And the many cannot object without being ostracized.
What about scientific dogmatism? Scientific dogmatism is more akin to intellectually bullying, where intolerant believers seek subservience to scientific faith beliefs not held my many. And the many cannot object without being ostracized.
Scientific faith beliefs in evolution? Explain.
OK, we will.
Evolution as a naturalistic explanation for human existence from a first life form is the creation story for those who have chosen to believe a larger philosophy of nature, variously held by many as naturalism, materialism, rationalism, atheism, or any other “ism” that denies God’s action in nature. In the Godless-isms‘ view science is free of all faith beliefs.
But is it? It seems the position of all the Godless-isms and their creation story of evolution rests on at least two necessary faith beliefs.
First, all the Godless-isms must believe in the Godless creation and sustenance of a necessary first life form having extremely complex replicable information-coded DNA. Try as they might with great gusto and hopeful headlines, there is no plausible explanation for that first guy (or gal). The best evolutionists have to offer is the theory of Francis Crick (DNA’s c0-discoverer) that the first necessary life form was sent to earth on a rocket from another place in the universe. Lucky us!
Second, going further back than Crick’s DNA-shooting aliens, every theory of all the Godless-isms relies on the necessary presence of matter in the universe. Matter in every Godless-ism must necessarily be eternally existent and uncaused, or it spontaneously appeared out of nothing, uncaused.
The first necessary belief, a first replicable life form to start the great engine of random variation and natural selection rumbling blindly uphill toward humans, has no scientific explanation. It is a faith belief necessary to the theory of evolution, complete with maybe this, maybe that stories to satisfy the faithful.
The second necessary belief, the belief in uncaused, eternally existing or spontaneously appearing uncaused matter, is also a faith belief. There is no scientific reason to believe any matter in the universe exists uncaused, or appeared “poof” out of nothing. This belief is indistinguishable from belief in magic and can only be maintained seriously as an article of faith, also supported by maybe this, maybe that stories to satisfy the faithful.
So is the theory of evolution more akin to science or religion? Faith beliefs alone do not render it so. The real question is whether evolution is held dogmatically, or tentatively. One is a religious tendency, the other a scientific tendency.
Again, is the theory of evolution more akin to science or religion?
Think about it.