The Category of Evolved Religion

While categorizing and labeling can be helpful points of reference, it can also be very misleading. Misotheists often say that they hate "religion", but commit the hasty generalization fallacy to justify their own rebellion against God. Categorizing in this manner is disingenuous and harmful.

Background image: Pixabay / Ro Ma, modified with Clker Clipart

If you slip on your wading boots and trudge through the slough of an atheist social media location, you are likely to find fringe religious people (usually professing to be Christians) singled out to confirm their biases that everything in the "religion" category is bad; the exception is not the rule. Ironically, they have apoplectic fits when it is pointed out that atheism itself is a religion, and evolutionism is like it.

Each religion is different. I'll allow that many have some things in common, but categorizing based on superficialities and exceptions is foolish. Also, there are people who claim to be members of a religion but do not actually follow its tenets. That said, biblical Christianity — with creation as the foundation — has teachings that are unique and beneficial to humanity. Also, ours is supported by evidence. That's what happens when God gives us his written Word.

Atheists commit a common fallacy. They claim to oppose “religion,” then proceed to lump Christianity in with Molech worship, Egyptian sun worship, and Greco-Roman idolatries that worshipped Zeus, Aphrodite, Bacchus, and Dionysus. Anything that can be labeled “religion” gets stirred into a pot of poison stew that spoils the whole lot. . . . The same lumpers also conveniently define religion to exclude atheism, when the word religion is best used to describe systems of belief that individuals “rely” on to answer the big questions. . .

You can read the entire article at "Why Religion Is a Meaningless Category". Be sure to come back because we have another interesting article for your edification.

Materialists presuppose evolution, so they typically denigrate the category of religion as something that evolved as well. We know that Christianity is very different from others. An important starting point is — well, the starting point. God is our Creator and Redeemer, and believers in universal common descent evolution cannot evosplain away the uniqueness of the Bible, and especially Jesus, our resurrected Creator and Kinsman-Redeemer.

When secular experts talk about the evolution of religion, they make gods of themselves.

It’s one thing to study the history of religions and to compare their similarities and differences; that’s a matter of scholarly research using historical materials. It’s a totally different thing to speak of religions emerging and evolving over time, as if religion emerged in our hominid past and has been evolving on a line of progress. Scholars who do that are donning the Yoda Complex costume and pretending to be gods themselves, knowing good and evil.

The rest of this article can be found at "Creation: The Missing Ingredient in Religious Studies".