In the future, much of the material that I will post whether for or against
evolution will be followed by posts which consider the social ramifications of these worldviews. Today, most Western nations, if they have not adopted the evolutionary theory and given up their religious faith, are teetering on the brink of that decision. Spiritual faith has much to do with the success of evolution’s penetration into human thinking. To a large degree many churches in America are composed of families who hear the Word and rejoice but when they leave the assembly they do not put those words into action. In a recent article published in Answers, a creation magazine, it was noted that in a recent American poll, two-thirds of young people leave the church once they live on their own (taken from Telegraph,
June 22, 2009). The article entitled Battle for Kid’s Minds pointed out that the lack of education about the existence of a spiritual intelligence like God whether in the classroom, in the church, and especially at home has resulted in a slow but steady indoctrination of our children into evolutionary humanism. Joseph Stalin is quoted as saying, “Education is a weapon, the effect of which is determined by the hands which wield it.”
Many people I have had conversations with on the topic of evolution or the existence of God don’t know the arguments for or against evolution or the scientific proofs that point to a creative designer. It is far more difficult to converse with college-age students who, like my own generation, had it all figured out by the age of 19. Far from the safe security of home-life, they are barraged with the information given by their college professors. Generally, they are challenged to think liberal on morality, ethics, and humanism. Most if not all teachers have abdicated to evolution as a fact even if biology is not their own specialty. Peer pressure is slanted to engage in promiscuous behavior, uncontrolled drinking, experiments with drugs and guilt, remorse or shame is beaten out of the minds of our children as they meander spiritually lost in the halls of academia.
Many arguments against God and for humanism coming from these youths were
developed in my generation out of pure ignorance of the biblical text as well a lack of understanding of what evolution supposes and its link to atheism and rebellion against the sacred. To spend much time trying to convince those who don’t want to be convinced at this stage of life is futile.
What does this mean for our American homes? Have mothers and fathers diligently spent time knowing their own Bible, engaging their children in the study of the Scriptures? It has been my sad experience that of the thousands of Christian adults, especially parents are either not Bible readers or unfamiliar how to find useful teachings to help raise their children. Many are convinced that their faith is simply a belief in the unknowable. This is the very antithesis of God’s intent in revealing himself through the Bible. Of all people, the disciples of Christ who have access to multiple copies of the Bible in dozens of different versions and electronic forms, continue to rely on blind faith as the basis for their religious experience.
We compromise our relationship with our children, whether in pursuit of pleasure, or just laziness or maybe from ignorance of the word of God. We know our world is changing from communities, churches and civilized nations that once believed in the God of the Bible to a culture enamored by sex, violence, and materialism; never engaged in living unless it is in the pursuit of pleasure. We have become self-centered, semi-hedonists as individuals though compared to other nations we are still the most generous people on the planet. We would rather sin and live with guilt than resisting with a stamina of genuine conviction.
Who seeks for God? Who turns it into a daily passion other than career preachers? Even these often pantomime what they have been taught and not what they have discovered from their own studies. Biblical faith is reasonable and worthy of the search. Our spiritual health and that of our children is not to be founded on a blind faith. Faith itself is the evidence of things that are not seen. This is a paraphrase from the book of Hebrews. What it means is to arrive at faith in God and the Bible as His revelation to man, there must be sufficient material evidence bringing us to a point where the evidence demands a verdict. A decision to believe is a big deal and should require evidence. Parents who do not lead their children in this way of thinking, who do not engage them in a way that challenges them to understand how and why to study the Bible have lost the battle for their children’s minds to human philosophy. If they don’t believe in something they will believe anything.
Why don’t parents study the Bible as though their life depended on it? Blame the churches with their infighting, their impotency at decision-making, their acceptance of sinful behaviors and secular humanism and their failure to allow open unfettered conversation about the meaning of difficult passages. This is part of the reason why parents don’t know the Bible. They don’t want this drama in their life. Such drama comes with arguments, infighting, name-calling, backbiting, and malicious gossip of every kind; all in the name of safeguarding some particular religious denominational position or individual interpretation of the Bible. I have more than once been pulled aside by some Bishop, preacher or pastor (teacher) and warned that certain Bible topics were too delicate, too “controversial” to be discussed in a Bible study. WHAT? It is because of our pride in a favorite teacher/preacher who holds much honor within the churches/universities that we will argue what some scholar has taught us instead of what we can read. The one Teacher has taught us “…all things that pertain to life and godliness…”! Think now of Jesus and the Pharisees. Are we seeking the praise of men rather than of God?
Ignorance of the Bible opens the door for every sort of evil to come into the mind of the youth who have nothing filling their hearts and minds with the things pertaining to goodness, gentleness, love, patience, peace, kindness and faithfulness. While parents casually ignore their duty as spiritual pillars of the household, children are learning, at younger and younger ages, to explore adult sexual behaviors for which they are not prepared. They experiment with drugs and search out materialistic pleasures that bring them into a community of some sort where friendship and camaraderie, where acceptance and even a sort of brotherly love exist. By the time they leave home there is nothing spiritual in the foundation of their lives. And they are open for the colleges and universities of our country to continue the constant demeaning of a belief in God. Substituting the fiction of biological and geological, astronomical, and cosmological
evolution for the facts of life. Many will leave college and pattern after their parents, find jobs and marry, have children, and continue the cycle of ignorance inherited from their parents. If they are church-ed it will be because it’s a good habit. If they get involved in church it will be because it’s fun or has become a tradition. The greater questions about purpose, about thankfulness for existence or to question why they believe, will not be asked. Such a people will soon perish as a Nation for lack of knowledge.
For anyone who might think this is not a viable perspective of what’s happening in Western society consider a few thoughts from the thinkers of the recent past generation. Dr. Colin Brown, a notable 19th-century theologian, wrote in his book, Philosophy and the Christian Faith, “The most potent single factor to undermine the popular belief in the existence of God in modern times is the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin.” (Page 147). And again from the mouth of Newman Watts “In compiling my book, Britain Without God, I had to read a great deal of anti-religious literature. Two things impressed me. One was the tremendous amount of this literature available, and the other was the fact that every attack on the Christian faith made today has, as its basis, the doctrine of evolution.”–Newman Watts.
It is disturbing that viewpoints on evolution and divine origin are diametrically opposed to one another. In our textbooks, we read, “In fact, the theory of evolution is supported
by such massive evidence that most biologists view repudiation of evolution as tantamount to a repudiation of reality. Nonetheless, evolution, along with other theories in science, has not been proved in the mathematical sense… Organic evolution is accepted as the cornerstone of biology”–textbook Biology of Animals. How is it that an educated man can hold two opposing views at the same time and be called sane? On the one hand, there is supposed to be massive amounts of evidence for evolution so much so that that to believe otherwise one must be insane, yet evolution has not been proven? Are you confused yet?
In letters that Charles Darwin wrote to colleagues of his day he had this to say:
“Though no evidence worth anything has as yet, in my opinion, been advanced in favour of a living being, being developed from inorganic matter, yet I cannot avoid believing the possibility of this will be proved some day in accordance with the law of continuity. … If it is ever found that life can originate on this world, the vital phenomena will come under some general law of nature.” (Letter 13711, 1882).
Charles went on to say
“In fact the belief in natural selection must at present be grounded entirely on general considerations. (1) on its being a vera causa, from the struggle
for existence; & the certain geological fact that species do somehow change (2) from the analogy of change under domestication by man’s selection. (3) & chiefly from this view connecting under an intelligible point of view a host of facts.—When we descend to details, we can prove that no one species has changed: nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial which is the groundwork of the theory. Nor can we explain why some species have changed & others have not. The latter case seems to me hardly more difficult to understand precisely & in detail than the former case of supposed change. Bronn may ask in vain the old creationist school & the new school why one mouse has longer ears than another mouse—& one plant more pointed leaves than another plant. (Letter to George Bentham, May 1863).
But does not the difficulty rest much on our silently assuming that we know
more than we do? I have literally found nothing so difficult as to try & always remember our ignorance. I am never weary when walking in any new adjoining district or country of reflecting how absolutely ignorant we are why certain old plants are not there present, & other new ones are & others in different proportions. If we once fully feel this, then in judging the theory of natural selection, which implies that a form will remain unaltered unless some alteration be to its benefit, is it so very wonderful that some forms should change much slower & much less, & some few should have changed not at all under conditions which to us (who really know nothing what are the important conditions) seem very different.— Certainly a priori we might have anticipated that all the plants anciently introduced into Australia would have undergone some modification; but the fact that they have not been modified does not seem to me a difficulty of weight enough to shake a belief grounded on other arguments.— “
Still, without proof, evolution as a philosophy was and continues to be held up as a light in a dark place.
“Without evolution… the history of past ages… requires a God whose delight it was to cause suffering… this creator… like the ogres of fairytales, received his pleasure from seeing the sufferings of the creatures he had made. … The special creationist … offers us a God who throughout geologic
past was more cruel than any novelist has been able to depict… Which is nobler: to be molded out of clay in the image of the Maker, and then to degenerate; or “to be the chief product of a great life flood of millions of years, to have the ages labor to produce you?” From Herdman F. Cleland from Why Be An Evolutionist? Pages 72 Through 73.
Why should such a statement be meaningful? Choosing which story of origins to believe should not be a matter of how you feel about it, should it? If this way of thinking is viable for religious truth why not scientific truth too? Are you getting this? The argument is philosophical and while there is room for philosophical debate when it comes to the social and political ramifications of each worldview, real science should stand on proof not whether it is a nobler means by which to imagine our origin.
Are you frightened yet of the kind of madness that evolution brings with it once it is adopted? Listen to a well-known atheist’s position on evolution and its effect on Christian teachings:
“…evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and the Original Sin, and in the rubble, you will find the sorry remains of the son of God… If Jesus was not the Redeemer… And this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing…” From Richard Bozarth, writing in the American Atheist, ‘The Meaning of Evolution’, p. 30. 20 September 1979.
People who profess a belief in God but do not know why they believe in God have no
foundation to argue the rottenness of scientific myths like evolution. Education is the means to unfolding the failure of evolution as a science and the phony belief that religious faith is a blind faith. Teaching people to think critically about what they are being taught or what they have heard gives them pause to listen well and judge whether what they have heard is true. America’s educational system became victim to radical evolutionary theory in the early years of the last century. The 20th century saw the rise of humanistic ideals that placed mankind as just another beast and evolutionary based humanism advanced enough to set the agenda for values, ethics and the rejection of morality as an
absolute. In a second attempt to gather the humanists of the country (world) to an agenda, the Human Manifesto II was written. While it optimistically proclaimed that mankind would one day eradicate war, defeat racism and held human rights in high regard, it clearly set forth the evils of religion, a disbelief in the supernatural and life beyond the grave. Only Darwin’s evolutionary hypothesis can be credited for such bold attacks on spiritual humanity.
“We find insufficient evidence for belief in the existence of the supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant to the question of the survival and fulfillment of the human race. As non theists, we begin with humans, not God, nature, not deity… We can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species… No deity will save us; we must save ourselves… Promises of immortal salvation or fear of eternal damnation are both illusory and harmful… Rather, science affirms that the human species is the emergence from natural evolutionary forces… There is no credible evidence that life survives the death of the body… We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction.” From the Humanist Manifesto II October 1973.
Why such harsh dogmatic assertions? How does anyone arrive at such conclusions without doing any science? Any debate? Here are a few radical statements that encourage such a position:
“Christ’s teaching is… in direct opposition to the law of evolution. Christian ethics are out of harmony with human nature and secretly antagonistic to
Nature’s scheme of evolution and ethics. Evolutionary ethics are cool, brutal, ruthless and without mercy.” From Sir Arthur Keith an evolutionist and physical anthropologist from EVOLUTION AND ETHICS, 1947
“[Man] stands alone in the universe, a unique product of a long, unconscious, impersonal, material process with unique understanding and potentialities. These he owes to no one but himself and it is to himself that he is responsible. He is not the creature of uncontrollable and undeterminable forces, but he is his own master. He can, and must, decide and manage his own destiny.”—*George G. Simpson, “The World into Which Darwin Led Us,” in Science, 131 (1960), p. 966.
Aldous Huxley’s confessions ring the same.
“I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption… The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics; he is also concerned to prove there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do… For myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.”—*Aldous Huxley, “Confessions of a Professed Atheist,” Report: Perspective on the News, Vol. 3, June, 1966, p. 19. [Grandson of evolutionist *Thomas Huxley, *Aldous Huxley was one of the most influential writers and philosophers of the 20th century.]
Statements like this one are diametrically opposed to Christ’s teaching so much so that when men choose the lust of the flesh over the passion of the Christ, God lets them go their way. After all, he is a God who gives us free will.
“For this cause, God gave them up to vile passions…” Romans 1:2
If evolution is a science and has discovered laws of materialism that we can test then God is a myth.
“Darwinism removed the whole idea of God as the Creator of organisms
from the sphere of rational discussion. Darwin pointed out that no supernatural designer was needed; since natural selection could account for any new form of life, there is no room for a supernatural agency in its evolution.”—*Julian Huxley, “At Random, A Television Preview,” in Evolution after Darwin (1960), p. 41.
But if Darwinism is true, what is the evidence? If no evidence the assertion that God is not a reality is foolish. “The Fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” “ Psalms 14:1. Think of how radically opposed evolution is to special creation or at least the requirement for intelligent design. The creepy fairytales that are told as fact and called science are like poorly made “B” rated movies. Without education and freedom from indoctrination in our public school systems, these stories become our stories.
“In the world of Darwin, man has no special status other than his definition as a distinct species of animal. He is in the fullest sense a part of nature and not apart from it. He is akin, not figuratively but literally, to
every living thing, be it an amoeba, a tape worm, a flea, a seaweed, an oak tree, or a monkey—even though the degrees of relationship are different and we may feel less empathy for forty-second cousins like the tapeworms than for, comparatively speaking, brothers like the monkeys.”—*George Gaylord Simpson The World into Which Darwin Led Us,” Science, 131 (1960), p. 970.
A very different perspective from what we are told in the Bible. “And God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion…”” Genesis 1:26.
“With this single argument the mystery of the universe is explained, the deity is annulled, and a new era of infinite knowledge ushered in.”–Ernst Haeckel, The Riddle of the Universe. 1899. Page 337.
“How great are your works, O Lord! Your thoughts are very deep. A brutish man does not know; neither does a fool understand…” Psalms 92:5.
There is a growing suspicion that the underlying source of violence in our schools and
our society is a teaching of evolution. Darwinists claim there is no God. We are an accidental coming together of molecules on an insignificant planet near a minor star in just another galaxy (life has no purpose). If there is no purpose to life, if there is no accountability if there is no way out of the pain and the emptiness of life, then why not maximize the license and exit in a towering ball of flame. The Littleton school killers committed suicide. The young man Barton left behind letters describing the unbearable pain in his life and his utter hopelessness. At that time a Gallup poll of teenagers who had considered or tried to commit suicide found that almost half, 41%, cited depression or feelings of worthlessness the reason.
Memories of the Milwaukee serial killer, Jeffrey Dahmer, who killed and ate his victims was raised by a father who had this to say, “… If a person
doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then–then what’s–what’s the point of–of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth. That we all just came from the slime. When we–when we die, you know, that was it, there is nothing…” From an NBC dateline program that aired in 1994.
One notorious practitioner of Darwinism wrote, “He who would live must fight; he who does not wish to fight in this world where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist.” The statement was pulled from a book entitled Mein Kampf; his name was Adolf Hitler.
People if you don’t think your vote, your education, your knowledge, your opinion, your
conscious, the lives of your children, your legacy or the future of your Nation is your responsibility, your wrong! One day when the state owns your great-grandchildren, when the government decides whose life is worth saving and whose unborn child is of value; when inalienable rights become government sourced or government-owned; when you find your homes, lands, and families the property of a higher power seated someplace in Washington, it will be too late to voice opposition to the fraud of evolution. It should be apparent that evolution has permeated every facet of our institutions including religious, political and educational. The results is to denigrate the value of human life, annul what was thought to be evil or unlawful, unleash materialism and hedonism as acceptable and even “good” if not natural ways of
We all need to wake up. Keep the debate alive. Demand proof of scientific evidence for what we believe and hold dear to universal truths like morality, goodness, and love.
I hope to say something sensible in these posts, on this website. I hope you will find the need to know the difference between good and evil, between facts and fiction, between intelligence and mythology. And after you learn, teach others also.
A person’s worldview MUST be able to answer these 4 Questions?
Origin, Meaning, Morality, and Destiny.
It must do so with, Experiential Relevance, Logical Consistency, and Empirical Adequacy.
It must be Coherent, and Correspond to reality
Only the Christian worldview can properly fulfill all these requirements.