For those who reject evolution on religious grounds, do you think you'd accept it if you weren't religious?

Question

I ask this because normally I don't see much reason to question a scientific consensus. If the physicist tell me the world is 4.5 billion years old, I will accept it, because I am not an expert, and there are many different lines of evidence confirming this-- and it is the same with evolution. So, do any of the people who oppose evolution on religious grounds, actually consider themselves to be such an expert on the science of biology (not religion) that they can overturn what is a very robust scientific consensus? If you think so, please explain why you reject evolution.

eds: I am not Tommy, so I don't know who you've got me confused with.
If you are a physicist, which I doubt, because you use the "argument from incredulity" when surely you must have some evidence on your side -- explain why you think the Earth is young.

Morganie: I don't think they were cooking the books with this new experiment you linked: From the article: "Yet primitive Earth would have contained iron and carbonate minerals that neutralized nitrites and acids."
This seems to be an attempt to correct a flaw in the conditions of the original experiment.
One thing we seem to agree on is that once life begins, micro evolution will begin to take its course.

angeltress: I couldn't accept that God created species as they are, because there are too many fossils that show things that "look like" transitional fossils, whatever you want to call them... also, the amount of change that has been observed, even with artificial selection, leads me to believe that given that such fairly large changes have occured just through recorded history, it is extremely unlikely God created the species whole.. it is a possiblity I guess but the evidence as it stands would have to somehow be painting a very misleading picture.

Answer 1

VERY good point!!
I am a Christian. I am not sure whether or not "evolution is a fact".
It isn't that I reject it, necessarily, on "religious grounds" as you say, because God could very well have used evolution as His method of creating all the wonderful diversity we see among His creatures.
Obviously, the earth is a heck of alot more than 6,000 years old...my guess is that mankind has inhabited it for far longer than that.
I've read all about the bacteria that keep developing resistance to antibacterial medications.
I've read about Darwin's finches...cute li'l guys...
I totally understand that the hypothesis is that humans and apes came from a "common ancestor"...
I know what a "theory" is in scientific jargon...

BUT, I don't see any compelling evidence that makes me either accept OR reject evolution. To me, it is a possibility, but no more than that.

Maybe if someone could actually find the absentee parent...that "common ancestor"?

Maybe, if someone were able to explain all the big-foot sightings, or tell us about Nessie...or explain the common legends about dragons and magic?

Maybe if there had not been so many "corrections" in the theory, over time...or maybe if evolutionists could be honest about them?

I can accept evolution as a possibility...
Can you accept the idea that God created all the species as they are, as another possibility?

Answer 2

a lot of you when asking this question assume that people on the other end have ALWAYS been religious.

but in reality more people today are converts and not "inherited" into a religion then ever before.

since our schools (not only in US - but around the world, with exception of some closed islamic countries i assume) teach evolution, this means that every convert came to a decision at some point that he does not buy evolution thingy.

-------------

i personally reject evolution because there is nothing in evolution theory that is strong enough to defeat certain things i think are true about the world.

like the fact that science can model a scenario in which we all are descendants of Noah and his family not so long ago (people talk about Adam and Eve, but think - per Bible, God did populated Earth twice!).
and this model is created in multiple sciences, including DNA analysis.

etc etc etc

the point is: evolution is something you CHOOSE to believe. i remember in high school when we were studying it (and i come from non-religious background), i never believed a teacher :)

Answer 3

Hi. Good question and good point.

Although there are many - well at least a few - Christian biologists /scientists who can argue the pants off any evolutionist, my rejection of evolution is based squarely on my belief in the Bible as the revealed Word of God. It boils down to something like "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

now, is that bad? I don't think so. As a matter of fact, it is the only valid stance for someone who declares himself to be a bible-believing Christian. Sure, it would be great for us creationists if suddenly a bunch of bigwig evolution-loving scientists would throw up their hands and admit defeat, admit that they have been "cooking the books" all these years.... but that probably won't happen.

and i am no biologist or palentologist - but I am a bible student and I have studied that book for many years and I cannot fathom how anyone can read it with a unbiased mind and come away with anything but a pro-creationist viewpoint.

and because I believe it is the Word of God and therefore infallible, it makes no difference what scientists say or don't say - I attribute their theories and dating systems to bad science because true science would always line up with the truth of God's word.....

see?

god bless

Answer 4

Actually I rejected evolution in highschool biology when they were trying to tell me that the complex DNA instruction language found in the cell nucleus of amoebas and plants (which were supposedly some of the extremely earliest life forms on the planet) could somehow have come about without the idea of the genetic code. There is enough information in the amoeba's DNA to fill an entire 30 volume set of encyclopedia britannica... that's like saying that the articles of the encyclopedia were formed by the paper fibers and ink molecules gelling together instead of realizing that there was an intelligence that defined the language and wrote the instructions out on to the page.

I was also skeptical since I did not see a proven progression from single celled to multi-cellular organisms & when scientistis had proved unable to reproduce life from non-life in the lab.

For example - you know that experiment where they tried to simulate the conditions on the early earth? They had the basic building blocks of amino acids all present in a simulated primordial soup. They shocked it with electricity to represent lightning strikes etc. they tried to do whatever they could to get the simple molecules to fuse to amino acids the building blocks of DNA...

But they couldn't do it - even if the molecules briefly fused they quickly dissolved. They didn't stick even one to another let alone forming a vast complex language of instruction code!

Oh and nevermind the fact that mutations are extremely rare and usually fatal. And nevermind the fact that transitional fossils are EXTREMELY rare. And nevermind the fact that certain structures such as the eye are irreducibly complex and couldn't possibly have evolved piece by peice... these are all arguments that Darwin had said would shoot down his theory and they have.

Answer 5

Evolution is not a science it is a theory. To take a serious look at how complex everything is and think it just happened by chance is stupid, religion or no religion considered.

Answer 6

Since the Theory of Evolution is as yet unproven from a scientific point of view, then it cannot be stated as "fact."

Don't you think it's interesting that with the MOUNTAIN of evidence that evolutionists have accumulated, they still have not found their "missing link."

Answer 7

Even if I was not a Christian I would not believe in macro evolution. I believe in micro evolution but not an evolutionary change from animal intelligence to human consciousness. No one has ever shown me proof that an animal gained the ability to understand right from wrong. example a monkey takes a bananna from me does it know it is a thief. Only humans have this ability. Also no animal has the ability to ponder and invent. When I wasn't a Christian I did not believe this macro evolution.

Answer 8

hiya, buddy...good to see you.
there is so much in the way of scientific proof of evolution...it's undisputed.
my guess is all answers that follow me will be in the manner of 'big bang...how can everything in the universe start with matter the size of a pea?'
i stopped asking this kind of question, becuase i got tired of christians quoting tons of scripture and bringing up the Big Bang (which doesn't really hold water with me, anyway)

Answer 9

Tommy,
I am a Physicist and I want to tell you that this earth is NOT 4 Billion years old! That is ridiculous. I would not believe in murder of an infant no matter what my religious or non-religious stance. I opposed abortion long before I became a Christian. Have a nice weekend.
Thanks,
Eds


.

Answer 10

Nope, evolution has never been proved.

Peace be with you