Though I’m not sure it’s accomplishing much, I’ve been having an ongoing discussion with several evolutionists over the past couple of days concerning my post yesterday on “Creationism and Peer Review.”
While my post yesterday deals primarily with the intellectual bigotry of the dominant scientific community (which believes religiously in evolution), and the circular logic evolutionists often use for rejecting creationist arguments(refuse to give peer review approval of a creationist theory that is sound within its own worldview, then say lack of peer-reviewed material is proof that creationist arguments lack quality), there are some other issues in the realm of science and scientific interpretation which are more at the center of the impasse in this debate.
Today, Answers in Genesis features a piece on the common accusation that creationists reject science.
This issue is at or close to the heart of the difference between creationists and evolutionists today.
Contrary to the charge, creationists do not reject science, not in the least. Instead, they reject naturalism, which is a philosophy that has incorrectly become synonymous with “science” in modern language.
Science is the examination of the universe with intent to uncover how it is made up and how it operates.
Naturalism and materialism are doctrines or belief systems which posit that everything in the universe came about through natural processes with no supernatural influence or intervention. There is no room in this philosophy for God’s creative work or influence over the universe.
Science simply examines the facts, where naturalism posits theological and philosophical conclusions about those facts. While they are related, one should not be confused for the other.
It is even harder for disciples of evolution to be objective than it is for the typical creationist, so I know that what I’ve just said and what Answers in Genesis has to say is of the highest order of blasphemy to them.
But for those of you with an open mind to consider all sides of the issue, I would recommend reading the “Do Creationists Reject Science?” piece. It’ll shed a lot of light on why most evolutionists are speaking a different language.