Creationists use the word ‘belief’ for people who have faith in the theory of evolution. They are ‘evolution believers’. Which is true in a way, but they don’t believe in evolution the way religious people believe in religion.
Creationists try to characterize evolution as an alternate ‘religion’, you either believe in God and believe the Bible is literally true, or else you believe in science and you have no belief in God at all.
The real world is not like that at all. MANY people believe in both God and evolution, but obviously they believe in them both differently. One belief is religious, one is more practical, a belief in science in general, in the scientific method, the scientific way of knowing things.
This is pure projection by some creationists in an attempt to place their beliefs on equal footing with evolution. Because creationism is based on faith, creationists assume that all beliefs in the origin of life must also be based on faith. Because the evidence of evolution is incomplete (we didn’t see it), creationists dismiss it and claim that faith is required. Although not generally stated, there is the underlying assumption that an equal amount of faith is required to believe in evolution as to belief in creation.
In the REAL CHRISTIAN world, anyone who believes the MYTH of evolution is NOT a Christian.
Science has NEVER, and will NEVER prove evolution.
Evolution is not a science, but is a religion.
Science, of course, involves observation, using on or more of our five senses (taste, sight, smell, hearing touch) to gain knowledge about the world, and being able to repeat the observation.
No living scientist was there to observe the first life forming in some primeval sea.
No living scientist was there to observe the вЂњbig bangвЂќ some billions of years ago.
No living scientist was there to observe the supposed formation of the earth.
No scientist was there, no human witness was there to see these events occurring.
And they certainly cannot be repeated today.
All the evidence a scientist has exists only in the present. The average person (including students) are not taught that scientists have only the present and cannot deal directly with the past.
Evolution is a belief system about the past based on the words of men who were not there, but who are trying to explain how all the evidence of the present (that is fossils, animals, plants etc.) originated.
WebsterвЂ™s Dictionary defines religion as follows: вЂњCause, principle or system of beliefs held to with ardour and faith.вЂќ Surely this is an apt description of evolution.
Evolution is a belief system вЂ“ A RELIGION !
Well, their belief is actually correct.
Evolution, (I believe in it) is not guaranteed by some deductively valid proof.
The same for every single scientific proposition. This is just a fact of the sciences.
Scientific propositions are all given to us by what’s called, ":Induction.": Which is to be distinguished from ":Deduction.": If it’s deductive, it isn’t science, as, science is precisely a manner of inquiry by performing induction.
Inductive reasoning is reasoning that gives us a good reason to believe the conclusion, the more and more evidence (premises) that are provided.
Deductive reasoning is reasoning that gives us a necessarily guaranteed conclusion based on the evidence (premises) provided.
The inductive basis for evolution increases with every single finding we have of diversity in species. However, it still does take the faith in order to go from:
":It’s very much likely to be true.":
to go to:
":It is true.":
So, they are correct in this regard, but this isn’t anything saying that evolution is false, just that evolution is based in good science.
The faith part has to do with the whole undiscovered evidence thing… half of the hypotheses upon which the evolutionary model is based have yet to be observed in nature or validated experimentally – i.e. lack objective probative evidence. Asserting evolution is a fact despite the absence of this evidence amounts to having faith in undiscovered evidence.
OK how about we call it TRUST then, instead of FAITH?
Believing we all changed over billions of years from dust to doctors requires you TRUST the source you read that bit of information in, now doesn’t it?
Now that source, the first one you ever read (let’s pretend you’re over 14 and it’s been a decade or more)… if you went back now, would the information have changed since you read it? If you read it more than a couple of years ago you better believe it changed.
Now, do you still TRUST that source? Even though it admits it does not know TRUTH but only knows opinions based on conjecture of various measurements of things which we ASSUME we know what they were like ":billions of years": in the past?
That TRUST, my friend, is called FAITH.
It is having faith in an inconsistent ever-changing text book that makes zero sense to me compared to God’s unchanging word.
When you’re ready for the big leagues, open the big BOOK. The Holy Bible. TRUTH doesn’t change.
because anything not concretely proven requires a measure of faith in order to sustain belief in that thing
you know – as in evolution
1Ti 6:20 В¶ O keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace [be] with thee. Amen.
Because they are poor deluded heretics, and God has punished them with the gift of Stupidity.
They also like to claim that …
atheism is a religion…
Man came from monkeys…
The eye proves ‘intelligent design’…
A whole lot of other crap…
The thing about science is that it’s true regardless of what you believe. Scientists don’t wake up every sunday and say ":I sure hope gravity works today… let us pray that it does… amen!":
":faith": and ":evidence": almost seem to be interchangeable to them