OF RELIGION IN GENERAL AND THE RISE OF SECULARISM

 

By Gary Ray Branscome

 

          The philosophers of this world have never fully agreed on what “religion” actually is. Some of them think of it as rules and obligations. Others think of it as how God is worshipped, or as an ideology. The Apostle Paul, speaks of the “Jewish religion,” and calls the Pharisees the “strictest sect” of that religion (Galatians 1:13, Acts 26:5). James speaks of religion in terms of bridling the “tongue” and not deceiving the “heart”, and calls visiting “the fatherless and widows in their affliction,” and keeping “oneself unpolluted by the world” pure religion (James 1:26-27). Some years ago, I talked to a young man who used the cliché “Christianity is not a religion, but a relationship,” as an excuse for not attending church. I understand the point that the people who use that cliché are trying to make [we are saved by faith in Christ, not a set of works], but that cliché is just a word game because religion is more than just works, and flippant definitions like that can easily become an excuse for not doing the will of God. The truth is that no one has ever come up with one comprehensive definition of religion that fits every religion.    

 

          In the past, evangelical theologians have taught that there are only two religions in the world. That definition lumps all non-Christian religions together as religions of the law (or works), while contrasting them with Christianity, with its emphasis on grace. And, there is truth to that distinction because man-made religions see things in terms of what men need to do, rather than what God has done for us. However, the rise of secular religions in the last century has changed all of that. And, many of the problems that Christians face today stem from a failure to understand and come to grips with that change.

          The secular religions center around worship of the goddess “mother nature” disguised as science. This becomes obvious whenever those who embrace secular religion give “nature” credit for our senses, for our intelligence, or for life itself. By claiming that nature is our creator they are making nature their god, thus honoring the creation more than the Creator,” which is idolatry even if a statue is not used (Romans 1:25). To give one example: A recent issue of “The Readers Digest” contained the statement, “That wonderous invention of nature: the canine nose” (March 2021, page 56). Other publications contain many similar statements, and that deification of nature has become the official state religion of our government. The proof of what I say can be seen in the fact that our government promotes and finances that religion in the name of education and science.

          One of the doctrines of secular religion is the claim that the universe is billions of years old. Another is the claim that life came from non-life. And, a third is the claim that all the life forms on earth can be explained by simple life forms gradually morphing into more complex life forms. Furthermore, all of those doctrines are assumed to be true without the rigorous testing that sets science apart from philosophy. The purpose of such rigorous testing is to prove untested assumptions wrong – because that is the way real science advances. However, nature worshippers just interpret circumstantial evidence to support their ideas while explaining away anything that does not fit. In short, they interpret the scientific evidence the way cults interpret Scripture.

          Let’s start with the claim that life came from non-life. The scientific evidence against that claim is so strong that evolutionists try to avoid discussing it, at least with creationists. Nevertheless Darwin believed that life originated in a warm little pond. That is why they get excited whenever they think they see evidence of water on Mars. So let’s take a look at the scientific evidence. 

At one time it was widely believed that maggots would spontaneously generate in meat. In order to test that "hypothesis," Francesco Redi (in 1660) devised an experiment, consisting of jars that contained meat. One jar was open, another jar had a piece of cheesecloth stretched across the top, and a third was closed. Maggots not only did not appear in the meat that was in the closed jar, but flies were actually observed laying maggots on the cheesecloth. Two centuries later, many still believed that bacteria would spontaneously generate in broth. In order to test that hypothesis, Louis Pasteur (in 1859) devised an experiment that utilized several long-necked flasks containing beef broth. The necks on some of the flasks were straight, while others were bent in an s-curve. As predicted, bacteria only infested the broth that was in flasks with straight necks. When the flasks had curved necks, the bacteria stuck to the side of the neck, and could not get to the broth. Those experiments, coupled with the invention of a dust-free box at the end of the nineteenth-century, convinced the scientific community that life does not come from non-life. Atheists know that. And, that is why, when the atheist Richard Dawkins was interviewed for the movie “Expelled,” he suggested that life may have been seeded on earth by life forms that evolved elsewhere in the universe. That is atheist mythology not science.

          When we look at the fossil record, we find that about forty percent of the fossilized life forms are not extinct. We find fossilized frogs, dragonflies, turtles, figs, cats, and thousands of other species that are virtually identical to their modern day living counterparts. In other words, the fossil record tells us that they have not evolved. That is scientific fact! However, when we encounter a fossilized life form that is extinct atheists often claim that it evolved into something else. There is not any scientific evidence to support that claim. They just make it because it fits their religion, and because we do not have a living specimen that we can hold up to disprove it. Take for example their claim that dinosaurs evolved into birds. There is not one scrap of evidence that dinosaurs ever evolved into anything. In fact, modern birds have been found in the same rock layers as dinosaurs. So the claim that dinosaurs morphed into birds is atheist religion, not science.

          As to the age of the earth, many of the claims made about radiometric dating are false. In fact there is much evidence that the world cannot be as old as the evolutionists claim. While most of it is too technical to go into here, it is available through such research organizations as “The Creation Research Society” or “Answers in Genesis”. I could add much more, but this is a book of theology, not science or apologetics. Nevertheless, it is important to understand that Christians do not reject the “facts of science,” we just interpret those facts to agree with the truths that are clearly and explicitly stated in Scripture. In contrast atheists interpret the same facts to agree with their secular religion. And, the following verses describe what happens when a nation turns away from the True God.

Professing themselves to be wise… They changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creation more than the CreatorFor this cause God gave them up to vile affections: for even their women exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men doing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error that was fitting. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not right; Being filled with unrighteousness of every kind” (Romans 1:22-29).

 

REMEMBER

Opinions may contradict the Word of God, but the facts never do.