Replies

Can you NOW see how a 'believer' might have trouble 'accepting the word of science', with it's history of constantly changing it's mind, to the Word of God, which is said to be unchanging?

This is really one of the cornerstone arguments of creationists. Science is uncertain. Scientific theories change and/or are disproven over time. Something that is accepted today, might be gone over time. To many people, change is scary.

On the other hand, religion stays constant. One does not have to worry about ambiguity (especially if they read the Bible literally).

I can see how many people would consider change to be scary, and cling to certainty instead.

I have no problem with the changing nature of evolutionary theory. That said, I would like to address these statements:

To many people, change is scary.

I can see how many people would consider change to be scary, and cling to certainty instead.

Sand does not scare me, but I refuse to build a house on it. It makes a rotten foundation.

If you read just the first two pages of this thread, you'll find people claiming that evolution is not about how the origin of life came about, yet this was pretty much the central theme of evolutionary science education for decades. Some evolutionists may have claimed that God had a hand in the primordial soup or in shaping the creatures that resulted from it, but nobody was denying the primordial soup, least of all public school biology teachers. The more difficult the origins question becomes, the more evolutionists try to say it's not part of their gig. Sand shifts...