"Evolution is a religion" is a statement made by many creationists these days and is backed up by some of the 'big  guns' of the faith.  However, I implore creationists NOT to use this argument.  Not only does it create a wall between the creationist and the evolutionist that they are trying to reach, but it is a false statement.  Here is why.

Simply, the counter to evolution is creation.  Therefore, if evolution is their religion, creation is the religion of the creationist, which we know is false.  So the only way evolution can be claimed as their religion while denying that creation is the religion of the creationist, is by using the same false double standard that the evolutionist often tries to impose on the creationist.  So if it is not a religion and still not true science, what is evolution?

Evolution is a philosophical model  based on scientific research as interpreted through one particular worldview which is not supported by science nor the Scientific Method, but held by faith in unknowable, untestable, unprovable assumptions.  In short, it is a belief held by faith.  This may seem a small difference in wording, but it is a very important one.

If you claim evolution is a religion the first thing that happens is you put up a barrier between yourself and the person you are trying to reach.  This is okay if you have a way around the barrier.  The problem is, you don't.  You cannot prove this to them.  However if you state that evolution is based on science because it does use scientific tests and measures even though they are founded on unscientific assumptions and presuppositions, you have given the evolutionist the recognition that you are not simply dismissing them as ignorant.  No wall has formed and no weight has been given to their view nor taken away from the Creation account.

Admittedly, the added comment that evolution is faith-based once again adds the barrier.  However this time it is both true and able to be worked around.  You can now show them where the science that they do use, is founded upon assumptions that are not scientific, cannot pass the Scientific Method and must be held by faith.  

This creates an obvious comeback for the evolutionist: "Then creation isn't a science either".  The thing is, this doesn't matter.  Creation and evolution are as much 'science' and as much faith as the other one.  There are aspects of each that can be tested through valid science.  But each side's arguments still eventually fall upon faith.  This does not hurt the creationist's case in the least because God demands faith, so it fits perfectly.  However it demolishes the evolutionist's claim (which is why they still will not admit it).  The point is, the creationist shouldn't care which label, science or faith, is used for our model as long as it is the same label applied to evolution since they are based on the same type of foundation.

In the end, stating that evolution is a religion is false and creates an insurmountable barrier between the creationist and the ones they are suppose to be reaching out to.  However stating that evolution is a philosophical model  based on scientific research as interpreted through one particular worldview which is not supported by science nor the Scientific Method, but held by faith in unknowable, untestable, unprovable assumptions - a belief held by faith - is true and leaves a door open upon which the Holy Spirit can still knock.

In His service... Arthur Smith