Replies

That the theory of evolution is atheism: "

First, it shocks the common sense of unsophisticated men to be told that the whale and the humming-bird, man and the mosquito, are derived from the same source. Not that the whale was derived out of the hummingbird, or man out of the mosquito, but that both are derived by a slow process of variations continued through countless millions of years. Such is the theory with its scientific feathers plucked off...

A second remark is the theory (evolution) in question cannot be true, because it is founded on the assumption of an impossibility. It assumes that matter does the work of mind. This is an impossibility and an absurdity in the judgment of all men except materialists; and materialists are, ever have been, and ever must be, a mere handful among men, whether educated or uneducated...

Thirdly, the system is thoroughly atheistic, and therefore cannot possibly stand. God has revealed His existence and His government of the world so clearly and so authoritatively, that any philosophical or scientific speculations inconsistent with those truths are like cobwebs in the track of a tornado. They offer no sensible resistance. The mere naturalist, the man devoted so exclusively to the study of nature as to believe in nothing but natural causes, is not able to understand the strength with which moral and religious convictions take hold of the minds of men. These convictions however, are the strongest, the most ennobling, and the most dangerous for any class of men to disregard or ignore.

In saying that the system is atheistic, it is not said that Mr. Darwin is an atheist. Nor is it meant that every one who adopts the theory does it in an atheistic sense...His theory is that hundreds or thousands of millions of years ago God called a living germ, or living germ, into existence, and that since that time God has no more to do with the universe than if He did not exist. This is atheism to all intents and purposes, because it leaves the soul as entirely without God, without a Father, Helper, or Ruler, as the doctrine of Epicurus or of Comte." Charles Hodge, Princeton Theologian, Systematic Theology, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1975, vol. 2, p. 15

"It assumes that matter does the work of mind."

Without explaining this at all, I can only imagine that you believe there is a will behind genetic variation and gene mutations. In fact, some mutations are fatal, others do nothing at all, others cause such severe problems that the organism is unable to live long enough to breed, and once in a long, long time, a mutation will be beneficial to an organism.

Give a blind man a gun and tell him to shoot a target. If he gets it on the first shot, then it's almost certain that there was a will guiding his aim. The theory of evolution, however, says that if you give the guy a few billion bullets, have him fire in random directions, and give him a few million years, he'll eventually hit the bullseye.

Gene mutations are a provable fact. Genetic variation is a provable fact. Natural selection is a provable fact. The only question is, what happens if you let them all play together for a few million years? That's what the theory of Evolution describes - what happens, under different circumstances, if you let those three main forces play together over long periods of time. Combined with the fossil record, it paints a reasonably complete picture, considering how young we are as a species capable of observing it.

"Thirdly, the system is thoroughly atheistic, and therefore cannot possibly stand."

No good scientist so readily dismisses things. Anything is possible - it's all a matter of probabilities. You can apply Occam's Razor to put together a rather plain understanding of things. Most of us enjoy a bit of complexity in the world around us, as that fuels the imagination and the natural, innate curiosity of man.

"The mere naturalist, the man devoted so exclusively to the study of nature as to believe in nothing but natural causes, is not able to understand the strength with which moral and religious convictions take hold of the minds of men."

And what of those who leave themselves open to possibilities on both sides of the fence? Einstein was a religious man, yet he explained a lot about the world to us mere average folks. His was a genius not constrained by any dogma - religious or secular - which allowed him to persue the ultimate goal of truth unencumbered by such inflexible preconceptions.

"God called a living germ ... into existence," ... "since that time God has no more to do with the universe" "This is atheism"

Belief in God is atheism? Or is it that not sharing your particular beliefs about God is atheism? It's understandable that a system which doesn't require any maintenance at all would seem foreign to such imperfect beings as us, but is it truly beyond the realm of possibility that God created just such a system? In the argument between creationists and evolutionists, I find it striking that few seem willing to acknowledge the concept that the Pope has already said: that evolution need not be incompatible with religion or religious beliefs.

I also find it funny when I think about how some must view the early Earth - with men running around being chased by dinosaurs. :-)