Creation: Question Evolution Campaign — 11 of 15

A Sunday guest post by my brilliant husband, Gregg.

Every Sunday, my clever husband offers me a “day of rest” by taking over the homemaker duties here. His primary topic, the Biblical Truth of Creation vs. Darwinism, is a subject that has broad reaching scientific, social, and metaphysical implications and is gaining more and more attention in our modern culture. For believers and non-believers alike, the primary purpose is to present scientific, historical, logical, and/or sociological data in an empirical and defensible fashion, as much as possible written in layman’s terms, and in a format suitable for supplementing any homeschool curriculum whether you choose to believe the Biblical account — or secular guesses — about the origins of human life on earth.

Origin of the Mind

Question number 11 in the creation.com Question Evolution campaign is, “How did blind chemistry create mind/intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?”

If everything evolved, and we invented God, as per evolutionary teaching, what purpose or meaning is there to human life? Should students be learning nihilism (life is meaningless) in science classes? Why, then, do we also teach philosophy? What is the outcome of generations of nihilist indoctrination on our culture?

“Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear — and I must say that these are basically Darwin’s views. There are no gods, no purposive forces of any kind, no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I’m going to be completely dead. That’s just all! That’s going to be the end of me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans either. What an unintelligible idea!”
Professor William Provine, PhD; Professor of Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University, from a debate in 1994 at Stanford University

In the USA, our forefathers founded a nation on the principles that all people are “created” equal, and that all human beings have unalienable rights that are endowed upon us by our “Creator,” and that among them are the right to life and liberty. These principles are clearly the natural and very logical conclusions one reaches when one understands that we are created beings, that our creator is a supreme intelligence and the lawgiver of the universe, that our lives have meaning and value. Since the 1960s, we have gone very far away from those very simple principles.

In the teachings of the Bible, there are very clear moral absolutes.  Murder, for example, is always wrong.  Lying (bearing false witness) is always wrong.  What kind of morality can come from the muddy relativism that is the natural offspring of the Darwinist philosophy?

While Christians define it as murder, Darwinism is so plastic and so morally relative, that it is perfectly fine to murder utterly innocent unborn human beings ala abortion, or the aged or infirm ala euthanasia.  It all depends upon who solipsistically gets to define whom is deemed the “fittest” in the context of the species.

Darwinian fraud is perpetrated on global and shocking scale.  When 200 year old fraudulent embryo drawings turn up in modern textbooks, the Darwinian apologetic is simply that the end often justifies the means.  In other words, lying is sometimes morally right, provided that the lie advances the Darwinian agenda.

In the teachings of the Bible, man is given dominion and stewardship over the entire earth.  This means that we are to sheperd all living things. On the other hand, Darwinists may be extremely cruel to animals; after all, under the doctrine of “survival of the fittest,” even the most gratuitous and painful actions can rationalized and justified as “helping” natural selection along. While on the opposite end of the spectrum, Darwinists elevate animals to the status of human beings, like those who wish to give human rights to apes, on the basis that we are all “related,” by the mythical common ancestor, so humans are not entitled to any special status.

Ultimately, a philosophy that encompasses every possible notion, has no particular meaning.

“The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.”
Richard Dawkins, Evangelical Atheist and University of Oxford’s Professor for Public Understanding of Science

By clinging to the above philosophy, Darwinists are in denial of even basic and foundational evidence that refutes thier worldview.  As GK Chesterton wrote nearly a century ago, ‘If an ignorant man went about saying that the earth was flat, the scientific man would promptly and confidently answer, “Oh, nonsense; of course it’s round.” He might even condescend to give the real reasons, which I believe are quite different from the current ones. But when the private citizen rushes wild-eyed down the streets of Heliopolis, Neb., calling out “Have you heard the news? Darwin’s wrong!” the scientific man does not say, “Oh, nonsense, of course he’s right.” He says tremulously, “Not entirely wrong; surely not entirely wrong”; and we can draw our conclusions.’

The Truth

If mankind is the result of an absence of design, a dearth of purpose, and we came from blind indifference — then why do we design, why do we live purposeful lives, and why are acts of sacrifice and altruism to better the human condition so very common?  In other words, how did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?  To read more about this question and it’s answer, go to http://creation.com/chesterton

I commit to you that I will publish every single comment that meets this blog’s commenting criteria. You may want to review that criteria before adding your opinion here.

God Bless you and yours.

Gregg

Resources:
Additional Posts dealing with Creation and Darwinism