Evolution as a "religion and faith commitment and complete world and life view"???

[Ada Lovelace]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism accidentally sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

Edit: To clarify, I accept evolution and I've never experienced any discord between my faith and science. Evolution is merely science to me, something I accept dispassionately, which is why this testimony was bewildering and I wanted to get other perspectives from those who accept it. Thank you all for your posts thus far.

 

[Heissonear]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism "accidentally" sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

.

I grew up an evolutionist. I majored in the physical and biological world evolution in college (geology). I learned knowing the past based on scientific principlal still required faith, and without truely knowing if there was a Creator, seen evolution of the physical world and biological life as a world view - it is called Naturalism - where everything can be explained by physio-chemical processess.

.

 

[Loudmouth]

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

Evolution is no more a religion than the germ theory of disease or the atom theory of matter.

Those who claim evolution is a religion are only trying to scare christians away from science because they find it threatening. Millions of christians across the globe accept evolution for the same reason that they accept all scientific theories, because it is supported by mountains of evidence.

You may want to visit the Clergy Letter Project to get an idea of what many christian leaders say about evolution.

The Clergy Letter Project

I would also suggest reading the essay "Faith and the Human Genome" by Francis Collins, a devout christian and former head of the NIH Human Genome Project.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

That essay is written by a christian for christians by one of the the most prominent geneticists in the US.

If you don't want to hear about evolution from atheists like myself, that's fine. However, I think you would learn a lot by listening to your christian brothers and sisters.

 

[Kunjax]

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

Of course not. Its as much as a faith based view as my acceptance of Germ Theory or the Theory of Gravity. That is to say, not a faith based view at all.

 

[Split Rock]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism "accidentally" sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

No. Not for me. I also find the conversion letter to be very suspect. Not only does this supposed former evolutionary biologist professor claim he saw evolution as his religion, he also had a complete misunderstanding of the theory itself. There is no "progress" in the theory of evolution, and I doubt very much that a geologist told him that radiometric dating required "keeping the faith." Also, I don't see it possible that anyone knowledgeable about geology could read The Genesis Flood today and be convinced by its arguments. Even many creationists see it as out-dated and flawed.

 

[bhsmte]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism "accidentally" sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

I tend to look at the evolution vs creationism debate, like the OJ Simpson trial.

If you don't have the evidence on your side, you have to work overtime, to bring the other side down to your level and of course, try very hard to claim the evidence is not valid.

The scientific community though, is much larger than the LA police department and I don't think has too many; Mark Furhman's to kick around.

 

[BL2KTN]

No. Not for me. I also find the conversion letter to be very suspect. Not only does this supposed former evolutionary biologist professor claim he saw evolution as his religion, he also had a complete misunderstanding of the theory itself. There is no "progress" in the theory of evolution, and I doubt very much that a geologist told him that radiometric dating required "keeping the faith." Also, I don't see it possible that anyone knowledgeable about geology could read The Genesis Flood today and be convinced by its arguments. Even many creationists see it as out-dated and flawed.

This. Unfortunately I have seen that the ICR and AIG are willing to put out propaganda knowingly... which really is confusing given their Christian morality schtick. Just a few months ago they put out incorrect information based on a false news story. When the news story was revealed to be untrue by people following them on Facebook/Twitter, they deleted the corrections from the comments and kept a known lie going.

 

[Dizredux]

.

I grew up an evolutionist. I majored in the physical and biological world evolution in college (geology). I learned knowing the past based on scientific principlal still required faith, and without truely knowing if there was a Creator, seen evolution of the physical world and biological life as a world view - it is called Naturalism - where everything can be explained by physio-chemical processess.

.

While some individuals are philosophical naturalists (empirical reality is all there is) science itself is not. What science uses is methodological naturalism. When doing science, one only works with the natural world. What the scientists personal views are their own but are irrelevant when doing science.


Dizredux

 

[Dizredux]

This. Unfortunately I have seen that the ICR and AIG are willing to put out propaganda knowingly... which really is confusing given their Christian morality schtick. Just a few months ago they put out incorrect information based on a false news story. When the news story was revealed to be untrue by people following them on Facebook/Twitter, they deleted the corrections from the comments and kept a known lie going.

Sadly, this is all too often par for the course.

Dizredux

 

[PsychoSarah]

While some individuals are philosophical naturalists (empirical reality is all there is) science itself is not. What science uses is methodological naturalism. When doing science, one only works with the natural world. What the scientists personal views are their own but are irrelevant when doing science.


Dizredux

This. Absolutely this right here. I will also comment no one who supports evolution views it as a religion

 

[Loudmouth]

No. Not for me. I also find the conversion letter to be very suspect. Not only does this supposed former evolutionary biologist professor claim he saw evolution as his religion, he also had a complete misunderstanding of the theory itself.

He has a degree in education, not biology. If he had claimed to be a working biologist who did research and published in the field of evolution, then I would be strongly suspect, but this isn't the case. He says that he taught at both the high school and college level indicating that he probably taught introductory classes which only requires a scant knowledge of evolution.

There is no "progress" in the theory of evolution, and I doubt very much that a geologist told him that radiometric dating required "keeping the faith." Also, I don't see it possible that anyone knowledgeable about geology could read The Genesis Flood today and be convinced by its arguments. Even many creationists see it as out-dated and flawed.

Darwin was guilty of injecting Victorian era biases into his work. What the author of the piece is guilty of is ignoring the corrections that have been made over the last 150 years.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Evolution is no more a religion than the germ theory of disease or the atom theory of matter.

Those who claim evolution is a religion are only trying to scare christians away from science because they find it threatening. Millions of christians across the globe accept evolution for the same reason that they accept all scientific theories, because it is supported by mountains of evidence.

You may want to visit the Clergy Letter Project to get an idea of what many christian leaders say about evolution.

The Clergy Letter Project

I would also suggest reading the essay "Faith and the Human Genome" by Francis Collins, a devout christian and former head of the NIH Human Genome Project.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

That essay is written by a christian for christians by one of the the most prominent geneticists in the US.

If you don't want to hear about evolution from atheists like myself, that's fine. However, I think you would learn a lot by listening to your christian brothers and sisters.

As I explained in a reputation comment I wrote to you yesterday, I welcome your responses and appreciated this one. I wanted to comment publicly so it's understood that everyone is welcome to respond to this thread. I just added a clarification to the original post that I accept evolution with the same dispassion that I accept other scientific and academic theories. The friend who sent me the link to the testimony on the ICR site is one of the few I know in my personal life who rejects evolution for religious reasons and has any emotion towards it, but on here there seems to be more who feel strongly one way or the other about it.
I just thought it would be interesting to get a broader range of perspectives.

 

[godenver1]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism "accidentally" sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

Edit: To clarify, I accept evolution and I've never experienced any discord between my faith and science. Evolution is merely science to me, something I accept dispassionately, which is why this testimony was bewildering. My friend has been indoctrinated with the belief that there is no evidence for evolution, that is a dangerous lie told by fallible men, and that it is accepted by "watered-down Christians" and secular humanists purely by faith. She absolutely believes evolution is a religion, but before reading that testimony linked above and talking with her, I'd never heard of anyone thinking it was, so I wanted to get other perspectives. Thank you all for your posts thus far.

I haven't read the whole article/interview, but I have read some. What I'm about to post should come with the caveat that I'm not very 'schooled' in the theory of evolution or the science behind YEC, which I assume this is.

I don't know why there seems to be such a rigid dichotomy between creation and evolution, as for the Christian theistic evolutionist, wouldn't they also technically be creationists, as they believe God created the universe still? (Although as I write that, the definition of creationism on this iPad states the two are in conflict, which I didn't think they were, looks like I stand corrected here). I don't think he two are mutually exclusive, but am happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

Also, as there are Christians who adhere to the teaching of evolution (like you) I'm not sure that it is in and of itself a religion, but again, I could be wrong.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't know why there seems to be such a rigid dichotomy between creation and evolution, as for the Christian theistic evolutionist, wouldn't they also technically be creationists, as they believe God created the universe still?

The common usage of the term "creationist" indicates that someone rejects the theory of evolution, and that creation did not occur through natural processes. The usage is a product of history where there was a christian movement against the theory being taught in public schools, and an overall rejection of the theory within certain groups of christians. The lines were drawn not on whether or not God created by whatever means, but by whether or not God used evolution. Theistic evolutionist and creationist were meant to describe those two camps.

Also, as there are Christians who adhere to the teaching of evolution (like you) I'm not sure that it is in and of itself a religion, but again, I could be wrong.

It is a bit strange to say that evolution is a teaching. It is a scientific theory, like any other. Teachings are usually associated with moral and religious lessons, not scientific theories.

 

[godenver1]

.It is a bit strange to say that evolution is a teaching. It is a scientific theory, like any other. Teachings are usually associated with moral and religious lessons, not scientific theories.

Okay, thanks for the heads up. I probably should have worded it different

 

[USincognito]

Worth noting that the "Acts and Facts" in which this interview appears was first published in 1977. Since then Dr. Parker has fully embraced Creationism to the point where his career was teaching at religious schools and being a member of the ICR staff.
About Us | Creation Adventures Museum

 

[keith99]

Yes, indeed. The idea of evolution was very satisfying to me. It gave me a feeling of being one with the huge, evolving universe continually progressing toward grander things. Evolution was really my religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything else for me, and I got quite emotional when evolution was challenged.

Bolding mine

The very first words the guy utters during the interview.

I'd argue that perhaps he finally started to understand the theory and started to realize he was not part of some grand progress. When he saw that rather than make any real changes in himself he chose to find a new grand plan to be part of.

As something to worship evolution leaves a lot to be desired. It is the rat race, with the rat who reproduces more and kills rather than being killed who wins.

Still it is. Like it or not it happens. Not unlike saying 'never the less it still spins'.

 

[bhsmte]

Either start a religion or sell books and DVD's about one that already exists, cashing in on religion is one of the easiest and quickest way to make a lot of money, just keep selling the same things over and over in different covers.

There are always people who don't do a lot of objective investigation on topics, that are ripe to be targeted by certain messages and it is not just religion.

Look at the self help industry and specifically books on diet, nutrition and exercise. There are so many phony books out there, but they sell like hot cakes because they tell people what they desperately want to hear.

 

[Papias]

Artemis, I think the question itself is backwards.


I mean, some of his statements I could agree with like the idea that the universe has progressed to grander and grander things, like the idea that many parts of our sinful nature are due to selective pressure, etc. And in every case, I see that as how God planned and accomplished His divine plan. So in my case, I agree with some of this statements, and as a result, Christianity, not "evolution" is my religion.

It's as if he was Christian, and someone mislabelled that as the religion of "evolution", and he was thus tricked by them. After all, any credible religion will be consistent with the real world, so a realistic Chrisitanity will include, and not deny, germ theory. If I were to make statements about germ theory that didn't deny reality, I get the sense that the ICR would label my religion "germ religion" instead of Christianity. Same for atomic theory, gravity, algebra, or the idea that there is an atmosphere of gas around us.

In all of those topics, as well as evolution, knowing that someone accepts them tells you nothing about their religion. There are plenty of Hindus, Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, and so on who accept those aspects of the real world, and they don't suddenly stop being Buddhist (or whatever) and suddenly become algebrists or such.

In all those cases, someone understands the real world, and has a religion as well.

The ICR page seems to be just an attempt to convince any Christian reading it that a requirement of being Christian is denying the real world.

Plus, reading into the story, it seems less and less credible with every paragraph. When he starts adding obviously fabricated stuff like geologists suggesting that the overall geologic timeframe was not valuable or decently stable, or that the dating methods aren't reliable (despite the fact that they all confirm each other), it seems clear that some creationist has simply fabricated this story.

Mr. Barker may well have re-entered school, or other basic parts of his story may be true, but it's clear from reading this that much of this is simply creationist fantasy.

Papias

 

[juvenissun]

A lovely friend who has been homeschooled her entire education and ardently believes in young earth creationism "accidentally" sent this link to a testimony about a man's conversion from evolutionism to creationism that is on the Institute for Creation Research site. She said it was intended for someone else, but invited me to read it anyway, and so I did. I'm curious for your perspectives on it.

From Evolution to Creation: A Personal Testimony

Does anyone here who accepts evolution regard it as being their "religion, a faith commitment and a complete world-and-life view that organized everything" as Gary Parker claims it was for him?

Edit: To clarify, I accept evolution and I've never experienced any discord between my faith and science. Evolution is merely science to me, something I accept dispassionately, which is why this testimony was bewildering. My friend has been indoctrinated with the belief that there is no evidence for evolution, that is a dangerous lie told by fallible men, and that it is accepted by "watered-down Christians" and secular humanists purely by faith. She absolutely believes evolution is a religion, but before reading that testimony linked above and talking with her, I'd never heard of anyone thinking it was, so I wanted to get other perspectives. Thank you all for your posts thus far.

You said you accept Evolution. That means you accept that human evolved from monkeys. That is a quite serious belief, and it goes against your Christian faith. Evolution is not just a science, which is not your concern. It matters about the value of your life.

It does not need to be one of your concerns. If so, you should not say you accept evolution.