Article VI, part 3


Truth or Dare (Article 6)

In this three part article, concerning the truths of Christ and the knowledge of humanity, we have seen how knowledge without understanding is dangerous because it lacks wisdom. Science 1 Especially concerning the subject of biological science. Part one, laid out the foundation to this truth, and part two began to reveal examples.

In this post we will continue to examine the dangers mankind can expect to encounter by utilizing academia as a means to remove God’s wisdom from the subject of biological science, rather than embracing it. We will also cite further examples of the foolishness of macro-evolution.

So, can Darwinism really destroy human dignity and remove hope from a nation? Certainly it can. Recall with me how Karl Marx saw the need to “dethrone God” from the mind of humanity. He desired this because he saw religion as a toxic drug that organized a false sense of hope inside mankind. Mr. Marx knew that for his atheistic ideologies, his secular humanistic political beliefs, to take root and flourish it would require displacing humanity’s hope in God. Once that happened, then mankind would be ready to accept his ideology of autonomy and social structure. As Darwinism teaches that mankind came to be without the help of God, and continues to evolve into a moral and ethical creature on his/her own, then so too (per Marxism) can humanity govern its self regarding moral and ethical issues without God’s help.

So as national leaders, such as Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Tse-tung, embraced the atheistic philosophies of Darwinism and Marxism, humanity was also forced to endure some of history’s most amoral and unethical governance ever brought to light. So much for mankind’s ability to be dignified without God; to govern morally and ethically without God. Death tolls of all four tyrants total any where from thirty-seven million to about sixty-three million. Why under Adolf Hitler’s reign (1933-1945) alone approximately eleven million, noncombatant, civilians of Europe died. Remember, as we stated earlier, knowledge without understanding can be dangerous.

Adolf Hitler was so influenced by Darwinian ideologies that it lead him to kill approximately fifty-thousand handicapped individuals at the Hadamar Euthanasia Centre, in Hadamar, Germany. Why is Darwinism connected to these killings? Because as Charles Darwin inferred in the book entitled The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (pub. 1871) the invalid and handicapped are nothing more than “useless eaters.” Adolf Hitler wasn’t simply out to kill Jews and push his anti-Semitic ideals onto his citizenry, he was also out to give aid to “Natural Selection” by killing any one genetically inferior to his ideal specimen of humanity or anyone no longer productive in society.

What was written in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex that would lead to such an amoral ideology? Read with me the words of Charles Darwin:

Charles Darwin “With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to smallpox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”

When God is removed from humanity’s existence and development — when mankind is reduce to nothing more than an evolved animal — then eugenics, and euthanasia, become nothing more than a means-to-an-end. Regulated procreation and sterilization, as well as regulated death become necessary to ensure that only the strongest and most productive of the species will be allowed to survive and thrive.

Despite Mr. Darwin’s attempt to soften his words, in the next paragraph, by suggesting that humanity has evolved to exhibit the “instinct of sympathy,” it is historically clear that mankind does not act sympathetic toward its own instinctively. No, humanity’s natural tendency toward one another is to act wickedly. Scripture tells us this, as well:

“The godly have been swept from the land; not one upright man remains. All men lie in wait to shed blood; each hunts his brother with a net. Both hands are skilled in doing evil; the ruler demands gifts, the judge accepts bribes, the powerful dictate what they desire — they all conspire together.” (Micah 7:2-3)

“For from within, out of men’s hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and make a man ‘unclean.’” (Mark 7:21-23)

Act of Kindness 2 Humanity is not instinctively good, nor is mankind naturally sympathetic (Ecclesiastes 7:29; Jeremiah 17:9). Traits such as love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control are all traits of God that appear in mankind because we are made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27; Galatians 5:22-23). Without God, humanity cannot treat one another in a dignified manner; mankind cannot experience dignity at any level, nor can they ever hope to. And just as Darwinism strips away humanity’s dignity, so too does the teaching of macro-evolution strip away the scientific truths that God has laid before us.

Remember with me the Linus Pauling quote, “Science is the search for truth.” The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “truth” as a sincere action, character, or utterance. The state of being the case. The Life Application Study Bible (NIV) defines “truth” as reality or fact. As science continues to expose the inconsistencies inherent in Mr. Darwin’s theory of natural selection, academia cannot be allowed to teach macro-evolution as truth. Examine with me a few more of the “holes” in Darwinism.

Charles Darwin once said, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” Well, “break down” it has. Ever heard of “Irreducible Complexity”? Simply put, it’s any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part destroys the function of the entire system. Basically, an irreducibly complex system requires each component to be in place before it will ever function at all. Michael Behe, a biochemical researcher and professor at Lehigh University, in Pennsylvania, is the one credited with having made this discovery. We’ll use his example of a traditional mousetrap to fully explain his find.

Mousetrap 1 You see, a traditional mousetrap contains five parts, and all five parts are dependent on each other for catching mice: the wooden platform, the spring, the “hammer” (the “hammer” is the bar that pins the mouse against the wooden base), the holding bar, and a catch. Each of these five parts are needed for the successful operation of the mousetrap. If you remove any one of the parts from the mousetrap you would not be able to set the trap, nor could you ever catch a mouse.

Note what this states: an irreducibly complex system cannot come about in a progressive process. You cannot begin with one of the five parts, say the wooden platform, and catch a mouse or two. Nor can you then add another one of the five parts, for example the spring, and end up catching a few more mice, and so on. No! All five of the parts must be in place before the mousetrap can function — period. A gradual process will only result in a system of five individually useless pieces. It can only work when all five parts are correctly assembled and made ready. “Irreducible Complexity” applies to biology in this manner.

Mr. Behe notes that scientists from the late 1800s to the late 1900s had a very simplistic model of a cell’s makeup. Without the electron microscopes, and other advanced technologies that now allow scientists to peer into the mechanisms of the cell, it was assumed that cells were quite simply nothing more than blobs of protoplasm. Therefore, it was easy for scientists, like Charles Darwin, to see cells as simple collections of molecules. But technological advances, made in the past twenty years or so, have revealed that cells are made up of very complicated molecular machines.

In his book entitled Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Michael Denton, a British-Australian author and biochemist, said this about the cell: “Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than ten to twelve grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized [nano] factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one-hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machine built by man and absolutely without parallel in the nonliving world.” Basically, Mr. Denton is saying that the cell is so complicated that it could never have evolved. After all, when was the last time you looked at a computer’s “motherboard” and wondered, “How many millions of years did it take for this to form?” If a non-biological, complex machine demands a biological designer, then most assuredly the more highly complex biological designer of that non-biological machine needs an even more highly complex and divine designer. Now, let’s examine one of these molecular machines.

Bacterial Flagellum Bacterial flagellum, is the most common mechanism used by bacteria to swim through various liquids. The bacterial flagellum is made up of three major parts: an ion driven motor, a hook, and the filament. All three of the parts, together, form a nano-outboard motor. When the bacterial flagellum is rotated, the filament forms a nano-supercoil, which gives it a “corkscrew” shape. This rotating filament spins at about one-hundred thousand revolutions per minute.

Flagellated bacteria are able to be subjected to directed movement through changes in the rotation of the flagellum. When the flagellum rotates to the right, the filament forms a long pitch nano-supercoil. This allows several flagella on a single cell to form a large mass, which moves the bacterium along a straight line in one direction. When the filament is rotated to the left, it makes a shorter pitch nano-supercoil; this causes the flagellar mass to break apart, and the independent movement of several flagella on the cell cause it to scurry unmethodically.

Cells are also programed by a highly sophisticated “software program.” Each cell’s programing tells it to behave in a specific manner. They are not functioning at random, unless they have become cancerous. It’s the cell’s Deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, that provides the “Language of Life” coding which dictates to the cells what they will do. DNA is one of the three major macromolecules necessary for all known forms of life. Again, if a non-biological, complex machine demands a biological designer, if a non-biological computer can’t function without a biological programmer, then most assuredly the more highly complex biological designer/programmer of that non-biological machine/computer needs an even more highly complex and divine designer/programmer.

It’s time the world realized that Mr. Darwin got it wrong. First of all, life cannot spontaneously arise from some “warm pond.” Louis Pasteur’s findings decisively refute the idea of macro-evolution, and over a century’s worth of scientific observation and experimentation have confirmed his findings time-and-again. And let’s forget about citing the famous Miller-Urey experiment, as it made use of unrelated conditions, a wrong atmosphere, low yields of chemicals in wrong amounts and a serious configuration problem, not to mention it lacked in proteins.

Pigeons 1 Second, Mr. Darwin conceived his theory of natural selection in part by observing breeders of animals. For example, Charles Darwin noted the way a breeder of pigeons managed to come up with a wide variety of pigeons. Yet we should remember that despite the breeder’s many varieties of pigeon, all the birds were still pigeons.

Third, Mr. Darwin was very much aware of the issues surrounding his own theory. One huge issue that frustrated Charles Darwin, to no end, was the lack of evidence in the fossil record. In fact after being confronted by the “Cambrian Explosion,” which we discussed earlier did not exhibit any evidence of a mutation between species, but rather showed the animal kingdom as abruptly appearing, Mr. Darwin made this statement: “The difficulty of assigning any good reason for the absence of vast piles of strata rich in fossils beneath the Cambrian is very great . . . The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained”

The fourth weak argument from Mr. Darwin was his study of “homology.” In these studies, Mr. Darwin took note that different creatures shared some common features in their skeletal makeup, such as the five fingers of the human hand and the five digits of a bat’s wing. Charles Darwin theorized that this similarity in different species was evidence for a common ancestry (a.k.a.: the “Tree of Life”). Yet this argument is strictly based on his analogy; one that quickly weakens since — again — the fossil record shows no gradual evolution from one species to another. Proponents of “Intelligent Design” can account for these similarities, though, as they are simply the result of a common design used by a brilliant designer.

There’s also Mr. Darwin’s hypothesis that proposes that humanity evolved from some type of ape, similar to the chimpanzee. He discussed this theory in great detail, in the book we mentioned earlier entitled, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. But when modern scientists look closely at the evidence they see what I’m calling Darwin’s fifth weak argument, as a huge amount of variance between chimpanzees and mankind exist. The original hypothesis stated that we human beings share ninety-nine percent of our DNA with chimps, but this has been refuted by the deciphering of the chimpanzee genome.

Finally, Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection is based on his anti-God bias. As we said earlier, the lie of natural selection began as a simple scientific theory, but that “simple theory” had a sinister agenda behind it. Charles Darwin’s agenda was rooted in his anger toward God. Mr. Darwin was angry because his beloved daughter, Annie, died at the young age of ten. So like many people before him, and since, Charles Darwin allowed his anger towards God to turn into doubt. His doubt then lead to finding an alternate “truth;” an alternate “truth” that was based in atheism. That was his choice.

Again, if we are determined to ignore the evidences of God and live within our doubts simply because we do not want to believe in God, or simply because we are mad at God and religion, then no amount of seeking answers to our questions — no amount of study — no amount of knowledge will lead us to see, and know God.

I want to leave you with one more piece of evidence to mull over in your mind. It concerns another fantastic truth surrounding the cells that make up these complex biological machines known as the human body. In the second article from this series we briefly touched on the fact that the human body is made up of literally trillions of cells, but did you ever consider what holds all of these cells together? It’s a protein called laminin.

Laminin 1 Laminin acts as the “glue” that holds our cells together, and in place. “So what does laminin have to do with macro-evolution and knowledge,” you may ask? Just this — laminin is shaped like a cross. Yes, the very instrument meant to destroy life, but that God used to grant humanity access to eternal life, is also inside our bodies and holding our trillions of cells together so that we might live. The cross of Christ, is the real “Tree of Life.” It is symbolized and discussed all through out Scripture and history, and it even does so from within the makeup of the human body. Truth is, no life exists apart from Christ.

Consider these words from the writer of the book of Hebrews:

“For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything . . . Christ is faithful as a son over God’s house. And we are His house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast. So, as the Holy Spirit says: ‘Today, if you hear His [God’s] voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion [time of anger, disappointment, doubting, etc.] . . . See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.” (Hebrews 3:4, 6-8a, 12-14)

In other words, don’t let life’s hard times turn you away from God’s truths and wisdom. Allow the knowledge and understanding of Christ to remain in your lives, until the end of your days. As Scripture says, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” (Psalm 14:1a) Don’t let yourself live a foolishly vile and corrupt life where nothing good is accomplished because your knowledge existed without understanding. The truth of Christ is in you, and all around you. Embrace God’s wisdom today.

Truth or Dare by J. Scott Harden is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at http://www.jasonmin.wordpress.com.

Scripture taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®. Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved.

The “NIV” and “New International Version” trademarks are registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by International Bible Society. Use of either trademark requires the permission of International Bible Society.

Evolution: A Theory In Crisis” © 1986 by Michael Denton

All rights reserved. The brief information quoted from this book appears in this article with the permission granted per the copyright statement which appears in the third printed publication by Adler & Adler, April 1986.

The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex” © 1981 by Charles Darwin

All rights reserved. The brief information quoted from this book appears in this article with the permission granted per the copyright statement which appears in the August 1981 publication, by Princeton University Press.

If your church or organization would like to talk with J. Scott Harden about a speaking engagement, or a writing project, please get in touch with Mr. Harden through Jason MinistriesTwitter account or Facebook page.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Article VI, part 3

    • Thank you for visiting. I agree with your comment. Darwinism has become a religious belief/ideology, and has ceased to be about fact finding or biology. In fact, it takes more faith to believe in macro-evolution than it does our Creator, as evidence continues to point towards God’s divine design and away from Mr. Darwin’s atheistic theory. Stop by again. 🙂

    • Thank you for this interesting rebuttal. I am not sure who the gentleman is in this video clip, and I’m certainly not sure of his religious ideologies from what I’ve just seen, but I disagree with his argument. He is stating that the proponents of I.D. base their argument regarding “Irreducible Complexity” on this statement:

      “Any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition ‘non-functional.'”

      Yet, in my studies that has never been the foundation to the argument that I have seen, nor is it the basis for what I have stated above. Let’s examine the mousetrap, again.

      It’s not that the five parts of the mousetrap are without individual functionality, on their own or in other combinations. No, the issue is that those five parts cannot function as a mousetrap on their own or in any other combination. It took a designer to blueprint and build that mousetrap to spec, so that it would indeed catch mice. Our bodies are much more complex and require much more effort than “natural selection” can account for. Evolution is a dangerous ideology; if this gentleman is a Christian, then he is very carnal in his theology if he is a real proponent of macro-evolution. Science is leaving the theory of evolution behind, with the evidence being discovered. It’s only those with strong ties to Darwinism, philosophically, that are making the effort to defunct I.D. and it’s evidences. I appreciate your time, but this argument does not defunct “Irreducible Complexity” at all.

      • Evolution is not an ideology and neither is it dangerous. Nor is not leaving the well supported theory of evolution behind.

        I don’t know where you get your information from but it certainly isn’t from any serious scientists.

        p.s. the man in the video is both a christian and a well respected scientists.

        Most Christians accept the theory of evolution.

        p.s.s. The five parts don’t need to function as a mousetrap on their own. Neither do 4 precursor parts or 3 or whatever. They may be useful to the organism in some other way or not useful at all. Just as long as they aren’t harmful.

      • First definition of an ideology is this — “visionary theorizing.” No aspect of biological evolution has ever been proven one-hundred percent. As I stated in these articles, there a many portions of micro-evolution that has been proven, but none of the macro-evolutionary methods have been proven. Therefore, evolution (the changing of one species into another, over a period of time) is still a theory.

        Second definition of an ideology — “a systematic body of concepts especially about human life or culture,” or “a manner or the content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture,” or finally “the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program.” Ever since Scientists and Teachers began promoting all aspects of the “theory of evolution” as fact they have been affecting the concepts of human culture. How people think of themselves and their communities. How they interact sociologically and politically. This influence is also why evolution, or Darwinism, is most certainly an ideology.

        The ideology of Darwinism is dangerous, because it removes humanity from God’s statues and teachings; it removes ethics and morality from our societies. Though not all followers of Darwinism are atheists, all Atheists are supporters of the “theory of evolution.” Atheism and the study of evolution are very tightly connected. The result is a very dangerous ideology.

        My information comes from theological studies, as well as medical and scientific journals. Most of these authors are very well respected in their fields of study. They just don’t get the front page support of academia, because to appose the lies of macro-evolution in favor of creationism somehow automatically makes one comical and unscientific. I discussed this in my articles, as well. In the end, though, the truth will be known.

        I’m curious as to what stats you bare when you say, “most Christians accept the theory of evolution”? Also, since when is the majority a good judge of what is true and right? Christ said, Himself. that “wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction.” (Matthew 7:13) That “gate” and that “road” wouldn’t be so wide and broad if it wasn’t so full. The majority can be, and generally are, in the wrong. I doubt seriously, though, that the majority of true Christians are ignoring Scripture for the sake of science.

        As far as your last comment is concerned — if any one component of a cell doesn’t act in the manner for which it was programmed, then it is no longer functioning as it needs to for the cell to do its job. Therefore, the cell becomes ineffective, and will possibly go rogue. Once a cell stops functioning as it should, it does become unproductive and in many cases harmful. Cancer is a prime example of what happens when a cell goes rogue and no longer functions as it was intended. Yet another reason why macro-evolution is impossible, as the life form dies before the new takes place.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s