occurring. The reason they are in such a dilemma is that they do not understand the foundational nature of the battle. Creation versus evolution is the bottom line.
If you find it hard to believe that evolution is related to the above issues, some basic research into history will demonstrate the connection clearly. In fact, I have not yet met one informed evolutionist who had disagreed with me concerning the relationship of evolution to these particular moral issues. They might not necessarily agree that this should have happened, but they do agree that this is the way in which people have applied evolution. It is important that you do not misunderstand what I am saying at this point. Certainly, evil, anti-God philosophies existed before Darwinian evolution. People aborted babies before Darwin popularized his view of evolution. However, what people believe about where they came from does affect their world view. When people reject the God of creation, it affects how they view themselves, others, and the world in which they live.
Particularly in the Western nations, where Christian ethics were once very prevalent, Darwinian evolution provided a justification for people not to believe in God and, therefore, to do those things which Christians would deem as wrong. As one non-Christian scientist said in a TV interview, "Darwinian evolution helped make atheism respectable."
We are now going to consider a number of areas where evolution has been used to justify people’s attitudes and actions. This does not mean that Darwinian evolution is the cause of these attitudes or actions but rather has been used by people as a justification to make their particular philosophy "respectable" in their eyes. These are covered in more detail and documented in Dr. Henry Morris’s book,
Creation and the Modern Christian
. (See the list of resources at the end of this book for details.)
1. Nazism and evolution
Much has been written about one of fascism’s more infamous sons, Adolf Hitler. His treatment of Jews may be attributed, at least in part, to his belief in evolution. P. Hoffman, in
Hitler’s Personal Security
, said: "Hitler believed in struggle as a Darwinian principle of human life that forced every people to try to dominate all others; without struggle they would rot and perish. ... Even in his own defeat in April 1945, Hitler expressed his faith in the survival of the stronger and declared the Slavic peoples to have proven themselves the stronger." 1
Sir Arthur Keith, the well-known evolutionist, explains how Hitler was only being consistent in what he did to the Jews — he was applying the principles of Darwinian evolution. In
Evolution and Ethics
, he said: "To see evolutionary measures and tribal morality being applied vigorously to the affairs of a great modern nation, we must turn again to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution produces the only real basis for a national policy. ... The means he adopted to secure the destiny of his race and people were organized slaughter, which has drenched Europe in blood. ... Such conduct is highly immoral as measured by every scale of ethics, yet Germany justifies it; it is consonant with tribal or evolutionary morality. Germany has reverted to the tribal past, and is demonstrating to the world, in their naked ferocity, the methods of evolution." 2
2. Racism and Evolution
Stephen J. Gould, in
Natural History
(April 1980, p. 144), said that "Recapitulation [the evolutionary theory which postulates that a developing embryo in its mother’s womb goes through evolutionary stages, such as the fish stage, etc., until it becomes human] provided a convenient focus for the pervasive racism of white scientists; they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal, adult behavior in lower races" (brackets mine). Gould also concludes that the term "mongoloid" became synonymous with mentally defective people because it was believed the
If you find it hard to believe that evolution is related to the above issues, some basic research into history will demonstrate the connection clearly. In fact, I have not yet met one informed evolutionist who had disagreed with me concerning the relationship of evolution to these particular moral issues. They might not necessarily agree that this should have happened, but they do agree that this is the way in which people have applied evolution. It is important that you do not misunderstand what I am saying at this point. Certainly, evil, anti-God philosophies existed before Darwinian evolution. People aborted babies before Darwin popularized his view of evolution. However, what people believe about where they came from does affect their world view. When people reject the God of creation, it affects how they view themselves, others, and the world in which they live.
Particularly in the Western nations, where Christian ethics were once very prevalent, Darwinian evolution provided a justification for people not to believe in God and, therefore, to do those things which Christians would deem as wrong. As one non-Christian scientist said in a TV interview, "Darwinian evolution helped make atheism respectable."
We are now going to consider a number of areas where evolution has been used to justify people’s attitudes and actions. This does not mean that Darwinian evolution is the cause of these attitudes or actions but rather has been used by people as a justification to make their particular philosophy "respectable" in their eyes. These are covered in more detail and documented in Dr. Henry Morris’s book,
Creation and the Modern Christian
. (See the list of resources at the end of this book for details.)
1. Nazism and evolution
Much has been written about one of fascism’s more infamous sons, Adolf Hitler. His treatment of Jews may be attributed, at least in part, to his belief in evolution. P. Hoffman, in
Hitler’s Personal Security
, said: "Hitler believed in struggle as a Darwinian principle of human life that forced every people to try to dominate all others; without struggle they would rot and perish. ... Even in his own defeat in April 1945, Hitler expressed his faith in the survival of the stronger and declared the Slavic peoples to have proven themselves the stronger." 1
Sir Arthur Keith, the well-known evolutionist, explains how Hitler was only being consistent in what he did to the Jews — he was applying the principles of Darwinian evolution. In
Evolution and Ethics
, he said: "To see evolutionary measures and tribal morality being applied vigorously to the affairs of a great modern nation, we must turn again to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution produces the only real basis for a national policy. ... The means he adopted to secure the destiny of his race and people were organized slaughter, which has drenched Europe in blood. ... Such conduct is highly immoral as measured by every scale of ethics, yet Germany justifies it; it is consonant with tribal or evolutionary morality. Germany has reverted to the tribal past, and is demonstrating to the world, in their naked ferocity, the methods of evolution." 2
2. Racism and Evolution
Stephen J. Gould, in
Natural History
(April 1980, p. 144), said that "Recapitulation [the evolutionary theory which postulates that a developing embryo in its mother’s womb goes through evolutionary stages, such as the fish stage, etc., until it becomes human] provided a convenient focus for the pervasive racism of white scientists; they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal, adult behavior in lower races" (brackets mine). Gould also concludes that the term "mongoloid" became synonymous with mentally defective people because it was believed the
Similar Books
