If the author thought Communists were “Darwinists” during the time of Chambers, he knows very very little about history.
Nothing in the theory of evolution denies the existence of God, any more than the theories of gravity and nuclear fusion means that God did not create our Sun and that the planets do not move according to HIS will (via gravity).
So add to historic ignorance the false premise that to accept a scientific theory is to deny God.
I am a fallible man and a scientist. Science has been the most productive means ever devised of gaining useful and predictive information about the natural world.
But your creationists teachers wouldn't ever deceive you would they? Of course they do. Lying about science is a creationists bread and butter.
It is absolutely a fact that the less educated a person is, the more likely they are to be a creationist. Creationist sources count on this, as their representations of what is “science” is so laughably inept and full of lies.
Lysenko Trofim is merely a smokescreen set up by you to disguise the fact that Karl Marx warmly embraced Darwin, as did Stalin. Marx was an antitheist. Communism is antitheism as well. Hence Darwin imaginatively annihilated God, then came Lysenko with his dangerous nonsense.
As for Chambers, when he spoke of the beautiful design of his daughters ear it wasn’t Lysenkoism he rejected at that moment but evolutionism.
Darwinism is naturalism. Naturalism is like a coin. It has two sides: materialism and pantheism.
Long before Darwin there were the mystical Upanishads, Buddha, and spiritual pantheistic evolution. Darwinism is merely the materialist side. Already many materialists are crossing over into mystical pantheism and embracing Eastern pantheist and Telhardian spiritual concepts of evolution.
Having rejected evolution. Chambers fully embraced true Christianity and then expressed his exasperation with unthinking individuals in one of his most imaginative essays,”The Devil,” which appeared in Life magazine in 1948. The gist of this essay is a conversation between a pessimist (Chambers) and the Devil.
The Devil struts into a New Year’s Eve celebration to boast about his victories.The Devil was immaculate, with a Miami tan.
Looking upon this designer-Devil,the pessimist muses, “Except for a face a little too characterful to be contemporary, the Devil might have been a movie magnate, an airline executive, a college president, a great surgeon or a grain speculator.”
The Devil then exulted over how well he knew the rationalist and liberal mind, the modern mind that still does not understand the nature of a commonplace like electricity but does not hesitate to question the existence of Heaven and Hell; the mind that cannot grasp the mystery of the universe . . . but does not hesitate to doubt that its Creator and the Creation are divine. The mind that denies itself on behalf of “science.”
The Devil brags of his master stroke:the introduction of evolutionary theory, and how the little monsters snapped at the bait.
The Devil gleefully boasted. “In less than a century I had undone the work of more than a thousand years and knocked the studs from under the religious culture of Europe. Why? Because Evolution explained the universe without Him. They wanted to get rid of Him. Then I knew the secret longing of their nasty hearts. Then I knew I had them.”
Chambers, through the voice of the Devil, is illuminating the real problem: men desire to get rid of God. They do not wish to be accountable to Him. They will follow willingly any new idea that replaces Him, be it evolution, communism, or whatever.
That, then, is the foundation for Chambers pessimism: men rebel against the Creator and seek to set themselves up as their own little deities.
But then, what did Chambers know? When he rejected evolution he lost his passport to the illustrious “inner circle” and “fell” in with stupid creationists.
By equating Darwinism with science you give the lie to your own objectivity. The Gnostic myth of a Godless universe is the foundation of Darwinism. The very notion of evolutionary biology is incompatible with a universe created by conscious will.
You may, of course, deride creationism. By so doing you simply relegate yourself to the world of moral relativism. In that world there is no truth. Lacking truth you have nothing to offer and your science is worthless.
If, on the other hand, your science is based on a quest for the hand of God in all things you are in league with others who search for truth.
Please tell me, allmendream, what exactly does Darwin's theory of evolution predict?
If it makes no predictions, then is it even science? It rather looks like myth to me.... JMHO FWIW