Can America Survive Evolutionary Humanism?

In addition to original Darwinism, today there are two other versions of evolutionary theory: punctuated equilibrium and neo-Darwinism, a revamped version of the original Darwinism. No matter the variant though, evolution serves as the creation myth for the theological and philosophical worldview of Evolutionary Humanism (Naturalism).

“Evolution is a religion,” declared evolutionary Humanist Michael Ruse. “This was true of evolution in the beginning and it is true still today…One of the most popular books of the era was ‘Religion Without Revelation,’ by Julian Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley…As always evolution was doing everything expected of religion and more.” (National Post, Canadian Edition, 5/13/2000)

“Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view.” (Humanist Manifestos I & II, 1980, Introduction, Paul Kurtz)

The primary denominations of Evolutionary Humanism are Cultural Marxism/Communism, Secular Humanism, Postmodernism, and Spiritual Communism. The offshoots of these are among others, New Age/green environmentalism/Gaia, socialism, progressivism, liberalism, multiculturalism, and atheism. Individually and collectively, these are modernized versions of pre-Biblical naturalism (paganism).

All worldviews begin with a religious declaration. The Biblical worldview begins with, “In the beginning God…” Cosmic Humanism begins, “In the beginning Divine Matter.” Communism, Postmodernism, and Secular Humanism begin with, “In the beginning Matter.” Matter is all there is, and it not only thinks, but is Divine:

“…matter itself continually attains to higher perfection under its own power, thanks to indwelling dialectic…the dialectical materialists attribution of ‘dialectic’ to matter confers on it, not mental attributes only, but even divine ones.” (Dialectical Materialism, Gustav A. Wetter, 1977, p. 58)

In explicitly religious language, the following religionists offer all praise, honor, and glory to their Creator:

“We may regard the material and cosmic world as the supreme being, as the cause of all causes, as the creator of heaven and earth.” (Vladimir Lenin quoted in Communism versus Creation, Francis Nigel Lee, 1969, p. 28)

“The Cosmos is all that is or ever will be.” (Carl Sagan, Cosmos, 1980, p. 4)

Evolutionary Humanism has demonstrated itself to be an extremely dangerous worldview. In just the first eighty-seven years of the twentieth century, the evolutionist project of radically transforming the world and mankind through the power of evolutionism has led to the extermination of between 100-170 million ‘subhuman’ men, women, and children.

First, in order that materialist ethics be consistent with the idea that life evolved by chance and continues to evolve over time, ethics must be built on human social instincts that are in a continuous process of change over evolutionary time. This view demolishes both moral ethics and social taboos, thereby liberating man to do as he pleases. Over time this results in a lawless climate haunted by bullies, predators, despots, psychopaths, and other unsavory elements.

Perhaps Darwin could not envision the evil unleashed by his ideas. Nonetheless, he did have some inkling, for he wrote in his “Autobiography” that one who rejects God,

“…can have for his rule of life…those impulses and instincts which are strongest or…seem to him the best ones.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p.7)

Humanist Max Hocutt realizes that materialist ethics are hugely problematical, but offers no solution. An absolute moral code cannot exist without God, however God does not exist, says Hocutt. Therefore,

“…if there were a morality written up in the sky somewhere but no God to enforce it, I see no reason why we should obey it. Human beings may, and do, make up their own rules.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 138-139)

Jeffrey Dahmer, a psychopath who cannibalized his victims, acted on Darwin’s advice. In an interview he said,

“If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then…what is the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought…I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime.” (Dahmer in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, 11/29/1994)

With clearly religious overtones, atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell summarizes the amoral materialist ethic:

“Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way.” (Russell, “Why I am not a Christian and Other Essays on Religion and Related Subjects,” 1957, p. 115)

Next, materialist epistemology and metaphysics dispossesses man of soul, free will, conscience, mind, and reason, thereby dehumanizing (animalizing) man and totally destroying not only the worth, dignity, and meaning of human life, but the possibility of freedom. The essence of this annihilation is captured in the following quotes:

Man is “but fish made over…” declared biologist William Etkin (Pushing the Antithesis, Greg L. Bahnsen, p. 224). And his life is but a “partial, continuous, progressive, multiform and continually interactive, self-realization of the potentialities of atomic electron states,” explained J.D. Bernal (1901-1971), past Professor of Physics at the University of London (The Origin of Life, Bernal, 1967, xv). Furthermore, “The universe cares nothing for us,” trumpets William Provine, Cornell University Professor of Biology, “and we have no ultimate meaning in life.” (Scientists, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible,” The Scientist, Sept. 1988)

Man... “must be degraded from a spiritual being to an animalistic pattern. He must think of himself as an animal, capable of only animalistic reactions. He must no longer think of himself…as capable of ‘spiritual endurance,’ or nobility.” By animalizing man his “state of mind…can be ordered and enslaved.” (Russian Textbook on Psychopolitics, “Degradation and Shock,” Chapter viii)

Finally, Evolutionary Humanism posits the notion that despite the fact that man is “but fish made over…” there are in fact, some exceptions to this rule. For it happens---by chance of course---that some lucky ‘species’ and ‘races’ of the human animal are more highly evolved (superior) and therefore enlightened than the others, who are---unluckily for them---less evolved and as a consequence, subhuman. Paired to this view is the idea that if a species or race does not continue to evolve (progress up the evolutionary ladder), it will become extinct. Together, these ideas lead logically to the deadly conclusion that in order to preserve the fittest of the species---or the spiritually evolved, as is the case with Spiritual Communism--- it is morally incumbent upon the superior to replace (via the science of eugenics and population control) and/or liquidate the subhumans. In his book, “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex,” (1871) Charles Darwin foresaw this eventuality:

“At some future period…the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world…the anthropomorphous apes…will no doubt be exterminated.” (Descent, 2nd ed., p. 183)

In practice, the materialist worldview is a hellish recipe for catastrophe, as was amply demonstrated by the 20th century’s two most blood-soaked political movements--- pagan Nazism and atheist Communism. Both rejected God, and both were animated by Darwinism

Hitler’s murderous philosophy was built on Darwinian evolution and preservation of favored species. In his book, “Evolution and Ethics, British evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith notes,

“The leader of Germany is an evolutionist not only in theory, but, as millions know to their cost, in the rigor of its practice.” (1947, p.230)

It was Darwinism that inspired Hitler to try to create---by way of eugenics--- a superior race, the Aryan Man. In pursuit of his ambition, Hitler eliminated what he considered were inferior human animals, among which were for example, Jews, Slavs, Gypsies, and Christians.

Evolutionism in Nazi Germany resulted in gas chambers, ovens, and the liquidation of eleven million “useless eaters” and other undesirables. Evolutionist Niles Eldridge, author of “Darwin: Discovering the Tree of Life,” reluctantly concurs. Darwin’s theory, he acknowledges,

“has given us the eugenics movement and some of its darker outgrowths, such as the genocidal practices of the Nazis.” (2005, p. 13)

Even though Karl Marx wrote his Communist Manifesto before Darwin published his “On the Species,” the roots of Communism are nonetheless found in Darwinism. Karl Marx wrote Fredrich Engels that Darwin’s ‘Origin’,

“is the book which contains the basis in natural science for our view.” (Marxian Biology and the Social Scene, Conway Zirkle, 1959)

Stephane Courtois, one of the authors of The Black Book of Communism, relates that,

“In Communism there exists a sociopolitical eugenics, a form of Social Darwinism.” (p. 752)

“Darwin put an end to the belief that the animal and vegetable species bear no relation to one another (and) that they were created by God, and hence immutable.” (Fatal Fruit, Tom DeRosa, p. 9)

Lenin exercised godlike power over life and death. He saw himself as, “the master of the knowledge of the evolution of social species.” It was Lenin who “decided who should disappear by virtue of having been condemned to the dustbin of history.” From the moment Lenin made the “scientific” decision that the bourgeoisie represented a stage of humanity that evolution had surpassed, “its liquidation as a class and the liquidation of the individuals who actually or supposedly belonged to it could be justified.” (The Black Book of Communism, p. 752)

Alain Brossat draws the following conclusions about the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, and the ties that bind them:

“The ‘liquidation’ of the Muscovite executioners, a close relative of the ‘treatment’ carried out by Nazi assassins, is a linguistic microcosm of an irreparable mental and cultural catastrophe that was in full view on the Soviet Stage. The value of human life collapsed, and thinking in categories replaced ethical thought…In the discourse and practice of the Nazi exterminators, the animalization of Other…was closely linked to the ideology of race. It was conceived in the implacably hierarchical racial terms of “subhumans” and “supermen”…but in Moscow in 1937, what mattered…was the total animalization of the Other, so that a policy under which absolutely anything was possible could come into practice.” (ibid, p. 751)

Ronald Reagan loved God and America. America he said is, “the moral force that defeated communism and all those who would put the human soul into bondage.” (Republican National Convention, Houston TX, 8/17/1992)

Even though he was optimistic about America’s future he nevertheless cautioned that America must maintain her reliance on God and her commitment to righteousness and morality. He liked quoting Alexis de Tocqueville’s insightful analysis of the source of America’s greatness:

“Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret and genius of her power. America is great because she is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” (In the Words of Ronald Reagan, by Michael Reagan)

As America moves into the 21st century, we have yet to admit a shameful, dark secret. Evolutionism…the creation myth, that empowered Nazism and Communism, is being taught to America’s youth in our government-controlled schools. The animalization of Americans is well advanced and coupled to a corresponding slow collapse of human worth. Already we hear of human life spoken of in dehumanizing categories such as ‘vegetable,’ “non-persons,” and ‘uterine content.’

Ominously, Evolutionary Humanism has also outstripped Judeo-Christian precepts in our universities, judiciary, federal bureaucracy, corporations, medicine, law, psychology, sociology, entertainment, news media and halls of Congress. As Biocentrism it fuels the nonhuman animal rights project, the gay rights movement, radical feminism, and the increasingly powerful and influential green environmentalist program, which demands that America submit to the draconian mandates of the Kyoto Treaty.

America, the “moral force that defeated communism” is on the verge of completely rejecting God, the natural order, and moral absolutes and instead, embracing the godless religion of evolution, amorality, and the unnatural.

Evolutionary Humanism is the most dangerous delusion thus far in history. It begins with the ‘animalization of Other,’ in tandem with the elevation of the ‘superior,’ for whom this serves as a license to make up their own rules, abuse power, and force their will onto the citizens. This is accompanied by a downward spiraling process that pathologizes the natural order, moral ethics, virtue, and social taboos while simultaneously elevating narcissism, tyranny, cruelty, nihilism, confusion, perversion, sadism, theft, and lying to positions of politically correct “new morality,” which is then enforced through sensitivity training, speech codes, hate crime laws, and other intimidation tactics. If not stopped, as history warns us, this rapidly escalating downward process leads inevitably to totalitarianism, enslavement, and eventually mass murder.

“A scientific analysis of behavior dispossesses autonomous man and turns the control he has been said to exert over to the environment. The individual…is henceforth to be controlled…in large part by other men.” (Understanding the Times, David Noebel, p. 232)

Linda is the author of many published essays on culture, worldview, and politics. Her essays are published both nationally and internationally. She is a member of MoveOff.org

Your essay reminds me of your writings in the introduction to

Don't Let Science Get You Down, Timothy:
A Lighthearted (but Deadly Serious) Dialogue on Science, Faith, and Culture.

Extremely rational arguments. Thank you tremendously for sharing your thoughts here. I agree: America was great because she was founded "under God" - even if nowhere in our founding documents will one find those particular words.

Question to the board: If my rights do not come from God, where do they come from?

Statement of Fact: My individual rights do come from God and are unalienable by man individually or corporately. Rights can be violated, but not taken away. To my last breath I am a free agent, because there is One God, One Lawgiver, One Judge, amen.

PS - I pray the Lord will grant that I may write a customer review at Amazon for you one of these days, ladies, if you would still like for me to try my hand at that.

Statement of Fact: My individual rights do come from God and are unalienable by man individually or corporately. Rights can be violated, but not taken away. To my last breath I am a free agent, because there is One God, One Lawgiver, One Judge, amen.

AMEN!!! The "God is dead" crowd want God dead for a reason: Man then becomes an easier prey. Any time someone takes a shot at God, it's man who takes the bullet.

All praise and glory to God!

Dearest sister in Christ, I would just love it if you were to write a review of Timothy at Amazon!!! Thank you so very much for your kind offer!

Note to anyone who might be interested in buying this book: It's less expensive at Faith and Reason Central

Hopefully, the Amazon pricing change we made will be reflected over there soon.

[.. Who says any of these things are metaphorical to begin with. Your assumption precludes a literal interpretation that is not borne out by the text, or further references to it. ..]

I've notice with the bible.. there is a graduation from the literal to the metaphorical content.. Two camps and those in transition.. Those addicted to the literal are weaker in faith and "vision".. Their God is weaker than the God that hides reality in metaphor.. Pure genius on Gods part, I think..

The literal interpreters generally think they have God locked into a contract and they have contractual rights.. metaphorical interpreters generally have given up all rights to God.. The Total Law(Statutes) vs. Total Grace.. Which is basically the parable(metaphor) of the talents lived out..

Most literalists I know quite literally miss most of the metaphor in the bible.. not all but most.. What do they miss?.. The most important ones.. That also is according to plan.. Pure genius..

The literal interpreters generally think they have God locked into a contract and they have contractual rights.. metaphorical interpreters generally have given up all rights to God..

Beautifully put, dear 'pipe!

[.. Look, I've said it before and I'll say it again. You either believe that the Bible is the word of God, or you don't. It's that simple. .]

Jesus spoke mostly in metaphor, the deciples wondered about that.. You cannot believe in something that you don't know.. Is Jesus(God)?.. then how does God speak?.. If you miss the metaphor you have missed the word of God.. therefore what you believe is not the word of God.. or a mere surface understanding..

Arthur Koestler:

"- The continuous disasters of man's history are mainly due to his excessive capacity and urge to become identified with a tribe, nation, church or cause, and to espouse its credo uncritically and enthusiastically, even if its tenets are contrary to reason, devoid of self-interest and detrimental to the claims of self-preservation.
The historical record confronts us with the paradox that the tragedy of man originates not in an excess of individual self-assertiveness," - but in a malfunction of the affiliative, group tendencies of our species; - "an excess capacity for fanatical devotion. --

cornelis:
I noticed that when you remove God from the hierarchy, something else floats to the top.

BB
Exactly. And we know what that "something else" is that "floats to the top."

Yep. Excessive devotion to the 'cause' will kill our republic.

Aw, come on. hosepipe...what gives. I certainly have not judged or qualified your faith in the discussion so far, so why engage in this type of rhetoric.

I'm disappointed in you.

I've got go make some moves on my chess games before time runs out. I might be back later....

[.. Genesis, chapter one, does not in any way deal with the human condition, therefore, if it is allegorical, it must relate to a scientific truth, or a truth about the dynamics of nature and matter. ..]

Genesis ch 1 pertaining to this planet is not about creation it is about remodeling.. or recreation.. The (@hebrew)word translated as creation(ch 1) is really recreation or remodeling.. The earth was here already but was remodeled.. WHo says?.. A Hebrew scholar I know.. I believe him.. ugh! them!.. there are more than one convinced of this..

If true, and I believe it is true.. something could have happened to trash earth.. i.e. some kind of mischief of the fallen angels(Satan).. Genesis's abbreviated account of earths remodeling is also metaphorical.. After all who could understand what it would take to REMODEL A PLANET?..

Beautifully put, dear 'pipe!

Looks like my disappointment is two fold...

Well, you guys are free to believe whatever you want, but until someone puts forth a decent argument that Genesis refers to eons, rather than what we understand as a twenty-hour day, then all you're doing is blowing smoke in the air patting each other on the back...

Of course, you're certainly entitled to it, if that's what you so desire.

[.. Aw, come on. hosepipe...what gives. I certainly have not judged or qualified your faith in the discussion so far, so why engage in this type of rhetoric. ..]

Sorry, I didn't mean to be judgmental in spirit..
Just musing a muse.. about things I consider "neat"...
Literal and metaphorical observations are important I think..
Very important.. maybe my emphasis got spit on you, sorry..

Your tactics are illogical.. you missed it..

If it's not oxymoronic (self-contradictory) or sophistry (using the same word with different meanings), then "illogic" seems to be the appropriate response. What'd I miss?

[.. Well, you guys are free to believe whatever you want, but until someone puts forth a decent argument that Genesis refers to eons ..]

Whether eons or 6000 years.. does it matter?..
Salvation from the Messiah does not rest on creation yarns..
There are many things in the bible that are not critical..
Meaning we can dissagree on.. and observe differently..

[.. WHAT DID I MISS? ..]
[.. Puppies aren’t muffins, so muslims aren’t muslims and christians aren’t christians. Got it. ..]

NO.... SOME muslims are not muslims and SOME christians are not christians..

Heck SOME republicans are not republicans.. (RINOS)..

Heck SOME republicans are not republicans.. (RINOS)..

That would be "some Republicans are not republicans".

When you say "some muslims are not muslims" does the word "muslim" have the same meaning in both instances? If so, then it is self-contradictory. If not then it is sophistry.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.