The religious nature of Evolution is readily apparent to anyone who spends long enough debating the topic. This is to the extent that although I initially intended to make this article a refutation of "Lucy" as an ancestor of modern man, as I made the meme, I ended up going further. Eventually I had to stop just because it wouldn't all fit on the meme without a bunch of editing that I was just too lazy to do.
Now, I do want to make it clear, lest Evolutionists twist my words and construct a straw man, that I am not dismissing scientists as being stupid or crazy, I'm not saying textbooks are entirely fictitious, and I'm not saying universities are ridiculous institutions that no Christian should ever attend. I want to immediately dispel any attempt to say I am promoting anti-intellectualism. I am, however, saying that Evolutionists revere these things in the same way as a religious person would revere their equivalents.
When the Israelites feared that Moses would not return from the top of the mountain, they commanded Aaron to make them a god out of gold. They worshiped the image they had constructed, claiming "you are the god who brought us out of Egypt". Effectively, they made a false image to replace God. In the modern day, Evolutionists do the same with a number of Evolutionary icons. One such icon is Lucy. Supposedly ancestral to man, Richard Leaky went as far as to describe Lucy's skull as "...imagination made of plaster of paris".
Despite such incomplete remains, Lucy's whole appearance has been fabricated to appear more human than ape, yet still too ape-like to be human. Evolutionists even depict her has having a white sclera, whereas most other animals, including most apes, do not have this. Lucy's image has been completely fabricated. It has not been, and indeed could not be, fully reconstructed by science, for the same reason we're still bickering about exactly what dinosaurs looked like. The difference? We often have more complete fossils of dinosaurs.
So, Lucy is an image that has been invented with the intention of replacing God. She's a complete con, much like every other so-called "transitional form" Evolutionists have made up. But it's not like people aren't willing participants in this scam. No, a large part of the problem is that Evolutionists, at the popular level, are not willing to question authority. If a scientist says Evolution is true, who are we foolish peasants to disagree?
Now again, I'm not dismissing scientists. One could compare them to the Pharisees of Jesus' day. Although Jesus had many disputes with the Pharisees, even He affirmed their authority. These are men who studied the Scriptures on a regular basis, and taught them with authority. The problem wasn't with their education, but what they did with it. They used their intellect as an excuse to make stuff up, and they expected the masses to obey them blindly. And they did. In the same way, no Christian need dismiss the education of an Evolutionary scientist, or deny that they usually do some very good science. Evolutionists may resort to such folly when it comes to scientists who reject Evolution, but we need not stoop to such childishness. But when the most common argument in favor of Evolution is "this scientist believes it", "these scientists believe it", "most scientists believe it", or even "as a scientist, I believe it", you've got a problem.
Connected to the authority of scientists is the authority of textbooks. I even once addressed a meme that says Creationists are only Creationists because one book is easier than a bunch of hard ones. But how do we know that what's in those "bunch of hard ones" is accurate? Especially given that not even Evolutionists still preach a lot of what is found in those books. The same applies to universities. Places of education can easily become places of indoctrination. All you have to do is stop teaching students how to think, and instead teach them what to think. Basically, if students don't learn to question what they've been taught, you can teach them that the moon is made of cheese, and they'll insult anyone who tells them otherwise.
Again, that doesn't mean universities are bad (and I'd like to point out how sad it is that I have to keep clarifying this just to avoid this common straw man). It just means that they can be a double edged sword. The religious nature of Evolution is unavoidable. Every single aspect of religion, both heretical and true, can be seen in Evolution. In fact, one religious aspect that not even the most hardcore Evolutionist should deny is that Evolution is, effectively, the atheist's creation myth. But just as the Golden Calf could not save Israel from the wrath of the Lord, so also can Evolution do exactly nothing to save an Evolutionist's soul. But praise be to God, in His mercy, He has given us something that can. Jesus took the full wrath of God on our behalf, dying on the cross and rising again. If we confess that Jesus is Lord and believe in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead, we will be saved. Now that's the kind of freedom from religion we should really want.