The is simply not true. Science, including evolution, is not a "belief system." It is a method of investigation of nature based upon some foundational premises which are subject to revision as new information is gained. Individual people who do research based on evolutionary theory may or may not be Christians any more than historians, mathematicians, chemists, or poets may or may not be Christians.
I'm apparently having some difficulty expressing myself lately since I agree with 99% of everything you say.
Science can certainly be a belief system that is used to deny the existence of God. There exists theistic evolutionists - but the majority of evolutionists are very happy to use their science to deny God as the first cause and will find any other theory on which to place their belief system.
Maybe the problem is how I understand "religion.":
- religion(Noun)
The belief in and worship of a supernatural controlling power, especially a personal god or gods.
My brother tends to value religion, but my sister not as much.
- religion(Noun)
A particular system of faith and worship.
Islam is a major religion in parts of Asia and Africa.
- religion(Noun)
The way of life committed to by monks and nuns.
The monk entered religion when he was 20 years of age.
- religion(Noun)
Any practice that someone or some group is seriously devoted to.
At this point, Star Trek has really become a religion.
- religion(Noun)
Faithfulness to a given principle; conscientiousness.
I'm using numbers 4 and 5 for my saying that belief in evolution, and all that come with it, could be a religion.
That is also not true. Evolution is a branch of scientific investigation of nature. God is not subject to scientific investigation because He is not part of nature.
You've totally misunderstood what I said. I take full responsibility. Do you think I don't know the above??
Not only is God not part of nature: HE CREATED NATURE. HE created all Laws that govern nature.
You are conflating science, which is the study of creation, and theology which is the study of the creator. There is no conflict in seeing God's hand in evolution any more than there is in seeing God's hand in any part of creation.
I'm not conflating anything. I said that HOWEVER everything came into being, God caused it. God is the first cause.
As far as conflict - There seems to be a problem in protestantism with evolution. In Catholicism there is no conflict, for example. And none is taught. God is seen as the Creator and He is able to create however He wills to.
The following is from Wikipedia.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Roman Catholicism[edit]
See also:
Catholic Church and evolution and
Catholic Church and science
While refined and clarified over the centuries, the
Roman Catholic position on
the relationship between science and religion is one of harmony, and has maintained the teaching of
natural law as set forth by
Thomas Aquinas. For example, regarding scientific study such as that of evolution, the church's unofficial position is an example of
theistic evolution, stating that faith and scientific findings regarding human evolution are not in conflict, though humans are regarded as a special creation, and that the existence of God is required to explain both
monogenism and the
spiritual component of human origins. Catholic schools have included all manners of scientific study in their curriculum for many centuries.
[107]
Galileo once stated "The intention of the
Holy Spirit is to teach us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."
[108] In 1981
John Paul II, then
pope of the
Roman Catholic Church, spoke of the relationship this way: "The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer".
[109]
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
There is also much on creation in the CCC starting with no. 293 and on.
Yes it does. It mixes science with theology. They don't mix. God cannot be measured, weighed, or directly observed and, therefore, is not subject to scientific investigation.
I said it creates problems. I agree.
It is impossible to prove God's hand in evolution using the scientific method.
Theistic Evolution is inserting religion into science. That's a bit like mixing milk and vinegar; they don't go together and you won't want to drink it.
So I can believe that God could use evolution but it is impossible to prove that belief since, again, God is not available for scientific analysis.
I can look at scientific evidence and draw conclusions about creation from the evidence and I can look at scripture and draw conclusion about God from what is written.
But, I cannot look at scientific evidence and draw conclusions about God that can be tested and proven correct or incorrect.
And I cannot look at scripture and draw conclusions about science that will be anything more than my personal opinion.
The Bible is not science and evolution theory is not theology.
But calling evolution a "religion" preaches well, puts butts in the pews and fills the offering basket. (Hallelujah :neutral {that's Hebrew for "whoopee!"} )
Anyway, that's how I see it.
iakov the fool
I agree with everything you've said. I do maintain that evolution theory is seen by some to be a religion. Those that would use it to vehemently deny the existence of God, and not only for scientific purposes.
Let me ask you, is atheism a religion?
W
