The Russian writer Fyodor Doestoevsky was famously quoted as saying, “If there is no God, all things are permissible.”
What Doestoevsky was getting at was, if all we are is a nice roll of some chemical dice, then there is no real answer to the question, “Why not?”
If we all got here by the survival of the fittest and the subsequent death of the unfit, then the inescapable conclusion is the strong should party and the weak should pay the bills.
Not exactly a recipe for a fair and just society, but then again, who said evolution was fair or just?
But if you think that vision of a world that not only celebrates nature red in fang and claw, but actually encourages us to get in on the action sounds bad, you haven’t thought through evolutionism far enough.
Evolutionism actually leads its adherents to a place where they can’t be sure of anything.
And no, I didn’t arrive at this by sitting in on a sermon in church.
That conclusion comes from the patron saint of evolutionary thought, Charles Darwin himself.
Darwin once confessed,
But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?
Interestingly, Darwin raised this point to refute the idea that design in creation implied a great Designer.
Even if the amazing complexity of the world around us points to a Creator, how do we know that our monkey like minds aren’t just playing tricks on us?
And if our brains are merely the product of happy accidents and chance mutations, he has a point.
Of course, he never quite got around to applying the same logic to his own theory of origins.
How did Darwin know that his conjectures on the “Descent of Man” weren’t just monkey-shines as well?
Ultimately what unsettled Darwin was this:
If we are the products of blind chance, who can say just how blind we really are?
The bottom line? Darwin believed his advanced homo sapien model brain lead him to discover the theory of evolution.
But since his advanced homo sapien brain was just an upgrade on the inherently inferior and flawed brains of lesser creatures, who could tell if his conclusions weren’t inherently flawed and inferior as well?
How’s that for an exercise in prehensile tail chasing?
But consider another possibility.
Neuroscientist Dr.David DeWitt offers this intriguing thought.
Perhaps we should look at this in a different way. Darwin was really showing the significant gulf that exists between the mind of man and that of the lower animals. One would certainly not ask a gorilla for financial advice or an orangutan for medical care, but we do get such help from people. Maybe we should view the gulf between the mind of man and that of the lower animals as providing evidence that we should trust the obvious conclusion that we were made by a Creator.
As International Darwin Day, February 12th approaches, the words of the Apostle Paul seem more and more on target.
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. (Romans 1:20-22)
Filed under: Uncategorized |