Assumptions of evolutionists
Over the last 2 years of studying and writing Geocreationism, I have slowly come to accept evolution more than before. Though I still have questions in my mind, I keep finding more reasons to believe that God a created a universe in which life would evolve according to His predetermined plan.
Early on in my blog, I found a post entitled Mass Delusion - 10 Reasons Why the Majority of Scientists Believe in Evolution. I never responded to it, but at the time as I was merely sympathetic to Evolution. While I am not full-on advocate for Evolution, it is the most logically choice to me, and fits my interpretation of scripture better than anything else I’ve studied. This now puts me in a better place to respond than before.
Before I go on, I need to breifly clarify what I believe evolution is in relation to God. Consistent with Molonism, I believe that God was aware of the outcome of every universe that He could have created. Each possibility was filled with different outcomes that didn’t happen because God did not create them, though He could have, yet didn’t. This universe however was created by Him and does exist, and does so merely at God’s pleasure. Therefore, this creates a mutual dependency between seeming randomness and God’s will. God willed the universe that would develop in the manner He chose, making any randomness within this universe a result of God’s choice. It explains why scientists don’t see God… the choice to create happened outside the universe. It explains why faithful Christians don’t see the randomness… the randomness was foreseen.
Okay enough of that for now. Following are the 10 assumptions by evolutionists from “two or three.net”, and responses as they apply to me. I suggests you visit Mass Delusion - 10 Reasons Why the Majority of Scientists Believe in Evolution to see their detailed explanations:
1. Many scientists have never studied biology and don’t understand evolutionary claims
scientists with degrees in sciences OTHER than biology have only tangential knowledge of evolution and biological processes. They must depend on their colleagues to really ferret out the truths.
- - -
many scientists just take the biologists’ word for it, and have not examined the data or thought through the implications and claims of evolutionary biology themselves - i.e., they are involved in group think.Â
My specialty science is computer science, and my own knowledge in biology is tangential. That is true. Now I am sure that many people believe in evolution because the scientists say and so there is some group think going on. On the other hand, most Christians who do not believe in Evolution have not studied ancient cultures as a backdrop to interpreting Genesis 1. Unfortunately, this argument cuts both ways. All I can do is make sure to make my choice based on the best information that I have. I continue to read both sides… scripture, history, science, and criticism, and the combination of both sides of these subjects have pushed me toward evolution, couched in Molonism.
2. Evolutionary convictions are often based on educational indoctrination, not independent thought
Given the originality of my interpretations of much of Genesis 1 (particularly Days 1 and 2), I believe I am free of that accusation.
3. Theories of origins are deeply embedded as a foundation of a person’s world view
True, no matter what side you’re on. Part of my world view is that God created the universe, did it on purpose, had it written of in Genesis 1, and we can study it in nature.
4. Evolution is the only naturalistic explanation for origins
I agree with the statement, but it does not drive my belief, as “naturalistic” is word that excludes God, and my acceptance of evolution does not exclude Him.
5. Many believe that to doubt evolution means you must become religious
I don’t know if this is true, but certainly those who doubt evolution tend to be religious. I however am religious, and accept evolution.
6. Many scientists are unable or unwilling to distinguish between their philosophy of science and their science, and between historical and empirical data
May be true, but I am willing (whether I succeed is another matter!), so it doesn’t apply to me.
7. Many scientists have an entire lifetime of work and ego investment in evolution
Not me.
8. Many scientists are not independent thinkers, and fear rejection and reprisals
I merely hate rejection and reprisals. If I really feared it enough to form my beliefs, I wouldn’t have started a blog that virtually nobody agrees with!
9. Many scientists fail to evaluate the difference between a theory in flux and one that is actually false
I disagree with this one. Nearly every scientist I’ve read agrees that all theories are in flux, but you go by what you have, and some have really withstood the test of time (like gravity).
10. The fallen nature of man wants to deny God, and is blinded both by it’s own sinfulness and the spiritually dark forces of this world
I am aware of this is atheists, but my intention is to glorify God, and I see His blessings my life, and I am prayerful about my ministry and those I impact (for the good and for the bad).
Â