I couldn’t pass this post up, though. I know it’s meant to be funny, and in some cases I imagine the Faith chart is true. The trouble is that the vast majority of scientists during the 1400s-1800s were all men of faith. They obviously had no trouble reconciling a material world with an immaterial reality, with faith.

I would also contend that neither chart begins with a neutral Start. Both begin with some presuppositions. On the Science side, you’d need to replace the Start box with “Evolution is True” and then work your way through the rest of the chart. Of course, the Faith chart, if it is honest, should begin with the Start box replaced with “God Created the Heavens and the Earth” and then work its way through the rest of the Science chart. And I believe that’s how most Christians, at least, operate. It’s the science community, I believe, that won’t acknowledge its presuppositions. Whether or not (macro)evolution happened is beyond question to most scientists. It’s their starting point. Contradictory evidence only revises the theory of how macroevolution happened—never whether macroevolution happened at all. As Harvard physicist, Richard Lewontin, has said, What are the other options to a scientist committed to a materialist explanation? He cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

Thanks,

-Grey