Warren Christian Apologetics Center
Affirm. Defend. Advance.
Simple Logo.jpg

Articles - Miscellanea

How Evolution Destroys Culture

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had made; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. (Genesis 2:1-2)

The second chapter of Genesis begins with the finality of creation. Although chapter two reveals details, particularly regarding the creation of mankind, the work of creation was finished on that sixth day. Despite efforts to the contrary, there is no way to reconcile the creation week to the doctrine of evolution. In addition to the essential incompatibility of these two competing views, we also wonder as to the long term ramifications of belief.

This writer is convicted that the doctrine of evolution has had a coarsening effect on our own culture, one that can be demonstrated in matters of morality, the value of life and of human dignity, and even in an attitude of hope in life.

TURNING and turning in the widening gyre; The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere; The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst; Are full of passionate intensity. Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand. The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man, A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it; Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know; That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle, And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?  (The Second Coming W.B. Yeats)

Yeats' poem seems Apocalyptic, perhaps overtly pre-millennial. Nonetheless, the world he envisions is one that has embraced and exalted evil in opposition to the light brought through Jesus. In many ways, we no longer must imagine the days of a bloody tide, drowned innocence, the celebration of evil. Those with real values and convictions are mocked and silenced, while wickedness is practiced with impassioned intensity. No one child will be born as a false Jesus in Bethlehem; rather our society, one that once valued Bible teachings has turned from the "Word made flesh" to another incarnate "savior." Yeats' words have proved prophetic.

Should culture be a concern to us? Few would argue that our culture has suffered from moral decline over several decades. For the evolutionist, the "missing link" between modern man and his supposed ape-like antecedent remains the elusive "holy grail." Ironically, it would seem that they are missing another important link: the link between the doctrine of origin and the behavior of a society.

Indeed, many of the most strident evolutionists and even atheists have affirmed the importance of ethical behavior (although in the case of the atheist, his basis of behavior is a puzzle to himself and others). Carl Sagan wrote of the importance of ethics in Parade  magazine; reportedly, Stephen J. Gould was a member of his local church choir! But these examples, and others like them, only serve to underscore the disconnect between their views of origins and their own beliefs regarding behavior.

On the other hand, the Bible makes a very clear connection between the gods one chooses for himself and his own eventual moral choices. Consider the description of Israel and Judah as they replaced the spiritual God of Heaven and chose to worship not only Baal and his companions, but also nature itself.

So they left all the commandments of the LORD their God, made for themselves a molded image and two calves, made a wooden image and worshiped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. And they caused their sons and daughters to pass through the fire, practiced witchcraft and soothsaying, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke Him to anger. (2 Kings 17:16-17)

Their heinous acts (including infanticide) should not be considered coincidental to their rejection of Yahweh. Indeed their evil acts were in perfect harmony with their view of origins. Can we, as we likewise reject God's role in creation, expect a different outcome in our society? Incredibly, one now often hears that religious fundamentalism is the problem with society. Thus, the 9/11 hijackers and members of project rescue are lumped together in the same comfortable package. Considering that the most fundamentalist Christian might be one who holds to the ideal that he ought to die rather than inflict harm upon his own murderer—hardly a danger to society and hardly the same as fundamentalism among Islamists.

Christian fundamentalism has certainly suffered in public relations over the last thirty two years. It is interesting to consider that the election of 1980 featured two candidates, one of whom was a fundamentalist Southern Baptist, and he was the more liberal of the two. It may be that Ronald Reagan and the 1980 vintage Jimmy Carter would be considered unelectable today because of their religious views.

Though evolutionists deny it, their theory has become a religion of sorts to them. Their defense of it against Creationism is impassioned, bordering on hysterical. In Ann Coulter's book Godless, she cited a number of liberal philosophies that mimic real religions, including their "Creation myth" of evolution. I suggest that in addition to these that Charles Darwin is the messiah.

Not all those who believe in evolution behave as religious zealots, but a significant number do. Despite the fact that a significant number of Darwin's key initial observations were just simply inaccurate, he is considered by many to be the most significant scientist, if not the most important individual in the world's history. Again, if we were to go back thirty two years to the campaign of 1980, when then candidate Reagan suggested that evolution might not be correct, the response was hysterical. For true believers, evolution is not to be questioned, and no alternative is to be considered. Sagan famously remarked on the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson that "evolution is a fact." Gould remarked in 1987, "The fact of evolution is as well established as anything in Science (as secure as the revolution of the earth around the sun), though absolute certainty has no place in our lexicon."

The religion of evolution is a self-worshiping one, which may explain much of its appeal. That is, through evolution one manages to remove a pesky God from his own preferred moral standards. Paul accused the immoral Gentile society of having done just that: "[W]ho exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen" (Romans 1:25). Evolution is an appealing religion; in it one finds himself at the pinnacle of the universe. He is a law unto himself, and those who dare challenge him with a real God ought to be prepared for a fight.

Evolution has also had a profound impact on our society in promoting the doctrine of flux. Clearly some things are subject to change, but our society sees particularly seduced by the notion of flux in every area. There is a peculiar arrogance to the assumption that no foundation is safe and no anchors are valid. "My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change" (Proverbs 24:21).

Scientifically speaking, knowledge and theory are always subject to change; we are not arguing against technological advances. However, it seems that in a number of examples, frivolous theories are given consideration solely because they seem to support evolution. One theory blames back pain on the fact that we ought to still be walking bent at the waist and dragging our knuckles. Some physicists are now propounding a "Multi-verse" theory of alternative universes. Such nonsense does not increase the body of knowledge, and it only delays the inevitable regarding the Cosmological argument.

To any evolutionist, there remains but one constant, one foundation, and one anchor: the theory of evolution. Recently I was watching a TV program on a space probe sent to the planet Jupiter. The NASA scientist indicated that probe's data had rendered previously held doctrines of the formation of the solar system immediately obsolete. As he put it "We had to throw out everything we thought we knew." This statement illustrates at least a couple of the fallacies of the thinking of evolutionists. First, it is doubtful that many allowed themselves to even consider any options other than evolution and its timetable as a starting point. Second, our tiny fraction of knowledge should not be treated as an infallible orthodoxy. One wonders just how many times those now jettisoned theories were expressed in these terms: "we now know..." And is it possible that the new theories are just as wrong?

Change is inevitable. But the doctrine of flux suggests that everything including the nature of man himself is subject to change. Does this notion, that humanity itself has no real and spiritual antecedent, have implications? That is, if we evolved from a single celled organism, doesn't it stand to reason that all morality is subject to change as well? Considering this further, if these things are so, it ought to have implications not only for the popular items like sexual morality, but also for such things as murder, rape, or assault.

While the Bible certainly acknowledges change, it also is a book of foundation. In Genesis 1, creation was established with continuity for each subsequent generation. "Then God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind;; and it was so" (Genesis 1:24). God is the changeless one. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning" (James 1:27). He remains the same though His creation will perish.

You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; Like a cloak You will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail. (Hebrews 1:10-12)

Evolution is a doctrine of despair in its outlook, its history, and in its implications. But to many in our culture, disbelieving evolution is evidence of a low intellect. Some who are contemptuous of believers in Creation are themselves unaware of any of the underlying questions or evidence. But they remain convinced that "the scientists are right" and to doubt them is evidence of ignorance. Many years ago Henry Morris remarked: "The main reason most educated people believe in evolution is that they have been told that most educated people believe in evolution."

Is it fossils that have caused so many to believe in evolution? Among the few fossils that have been labeled transitions, many have proved to be mistakenly labeled or ambiguous at best. If evolution were true, the transitions ought to outnumber recognizable species by many factors. Darwin anticipated that the transitions would soon come to light, thus proving his hypothesis. When they failed to materialize, it was deemed unimportant. Instead, it has proved easier to point to a fossil and claim "this proves evolution" whether it does any such thing or not.

Those who challenge evolution are subject to unrelenting assault, including personal destruction on many fronts. Recently one scientist made the news when fired by NASA, evidently because he expressed his belief in intelligent design. If Ben Stein's "Expelled" is to be believed, this kind of thing is not an aberration. Evolution has advanced through intimidation, and even deceit. It claims overwhelming evidence that it refuses to produce. It claims superior intellect and refuses to debate. It claims a better view of humanity and denies the implications of its own philosophy.

And what of those implications? While today's evolutionists are quick to distance themselves from Eugenics, it was one of the first noticeable phenomena wrought by evolution. Until Adolph Hitler, Eugenics was popular among intellectuals here and in Europe. Hitler's "master race" scheme was nothing more than Eugenics put into practice.

If evolution is true, what is wrong with racism? Shouldn't races compete for supremacy, not only subjugating others but even practice genocide? Isn't this "survival of the fittest?" Bible believers recognize that all men are of one blood as the children of God (Acts 17:26), and that in Christ we are all one despite racial differences. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:28). Evolutionists do not typically endorse racism, but they ought to do so!

If evolution were true, then extreme sexism is what works best. The male is typically bigger, stronger, and more aggressive than his female counterpart. Shouldn't he then dominate her? God gives us a different pattern of behavior that denies all of these factors, and encourages us to esteem the female. "Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered" (1 Peter 3:7). Evolutionists do not typically endorse the domination of females by males, but they ought to do so!

In contrast to the despair of evolution, consider the hopeful implications of belief in God. It is no coincidence that the worst villains of recent history all rejected the Bible (though modern atheists have begun claiming that Hitler was a "Christian" in an obvious attempt to distance themselves from him).

Consider the implications of the creation story for those who first read it. They too were in the throes of hopelessness and despair, having spent several generations being slaves in Egypt. Their bondage seemed particularly onerous; they were not considered to be much more than beasts of burden. That generation never really seemed to embrace their new found freedom, actually expressing that a return to bondage was better than the obstacles they encountered as freed men. After so many generations in Egypt, who knows what they did or did not remember regarding God? Did they know about Abraham, or had many of them forgotten those precious promises even as our own generation seems determined to reject our precious heritage of the past? God inspired Moses to write a marvelous history of their origin. In it, they learned that they were not animals, but the special creation of God. They also learned that they were descended from the great family of Abraham. They were not animals, but God's children. They were not slaves to fate, but children of promise. We suggest that the story of Genesis can have the same impact on this generation of despair today.

“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God, and keep his commandments:
for this is the whole duty of man.”
(Ecclesiastes 12:13)