The discipline of science and the mantra of "the separation of church and state" are twin arguments used by atheists, humanists, evolutionists, etc. to silence the voices of those who believe in God. In the same way mankind rebelled against God and believed himself to be godlike at the Tower of Babel, our generation refuses to submit to God while constructing "philosophy and empty deceit" (Colossians 2:8) in an attempt to justify their rebellion.
Regardless of claims to the contrary, evolutionists can neither prove nor test their claim of abiogenesis or common ancestry. Both of these theories are merely hypothetical explanations of the origin, and diversity, of life from a godless perspective. Neither abiogenesis nor macro-evolution can be tested scientifically. What is observable scientifically is micro-evolution (adaptation) within a species. There is no testable data which proves abiogenesis, common ancestry, or macro-evolution. Misleading students to believe that evolution is a proven fact is dishonest.
Evolutionists claim that Intelligent Design/Creationism should not be taught in science classes because it is not science. The same can be said for a theory that says that the universe is one big accident...that the laws of physics simply designed themselves. Darwinian evolution should not be taught as science, but as philosophy or social studies…if at all.
Opinions run deep on this subject, but the facts speak for themselves. Only the disingenuous refuse to admit that evolution, intelligent design, and creationism all contain beliefs that are based on faith. The same scientifically observable, testable, falsifiable, etc. etc. etc. information is available to both camps. One group allows for the possibility of the existence of a supernatural entity (Creator) and the other group does not. Therefore, the second group limits itself as to what explanations it can give for the origin and diversity of life.
The idea that science has proven God does not exist is absurd. Too much of the scientific community BEGINS with the premise that there is no God (just take a look at the comment section), so any discovery made cannot be allowed to point to a transcendent being of any sort. All of their conclusions must have a naturalistic explanation. It is a tragedy that a discipline engaged in the investigation of the universe will not credit the Creator who made that universe. Instead, it insists on finding ways of attributing God's handiwork to impersonal, random forces. This is a perfect example of what the Bible speaks of in Romans chapter one:
"For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools…" (Romans 1:19-22 ESV)
The "separation of church and state" argument fairs no better in these discussions. Non-believers attempt to wield the words from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson as though these words were ratified law. Atheists even try to use the Constitution, and its Amendments, to silence all but their own opinion. Do evolutionists fear honest discussion, debate, and dialogue? Is this why they are so adamant about silencing their opponents? Is this why so many of them revert to name-calling and insults instead of dealing with the issues and questions raised by their opponents.
If evolution were truly a proven fact, the debate would not still be going on. Those who believe in God have nothing to fear from real scientific facts. God does not contradict Himself, so if conclusive proof for evolution existed; the Christian should accept that and move on. However, there is NO conclusive proof of evolution. There is simply a body of scientific facts that must be interpreted. Creationists and evolutionists interpret these SAME facts in different ways. It is a fundamental difference in worldviews that leads to differing interpretations of the same evidence.
It is time to either allow both Intelligent Design (Creationism) AND evolution to be taught in science classes or to relegate them both to philosophy or social studies classes. Most of us are capable enough to sort out which ideas are true and which ideas are false. The honest course of action is to give both a fair hearing.