Replies

If we accept evolution as fact; do we not accept that we are becoming better (more evolved) as time goes on?

This of course creates the first conflict: How can we determine 'better' or higher without some standard outside ourselves.

But for the moment let's accept evolution.

It is only recently in the evolutionary travel of what is now (hu)mankind that there has been a 'religious' awareness in life.

We see no amoeba cathedrals in the fossil record, for example.

So if life is E-volving as opposed to DE-volving (it is of course, not the theory of DE-volution); would not the appearance of religion in the near distant path of evolutionary travel need to be viewed as an E-volution?

Could we not make the case then, that believing in evolution, we MUST accept that the (in evolutionary terms) recent appearance of religious thought is a POSITIVE evolutionary ADVANCE?

And since this advance brings with it a 'creation myth' with each religion; is it not logical then to point out that people who DENY religion and CREATION are in fact less evolved life forms trying to stop the advancement of the natural selection process?

By refusing to believe in creation, are these people not, in fact, refusing to allow for evolution?