Neither the arrogant Lenin, nor for that matter any Darwinian Humanists, can actually live according to the reductionism of the animistic-determinism they publicly profess. For if in fact they are nothing more than a soulless, mindless aggregate of matter (materialism) or a soulless body accompanied by an impersonal intelligence hovering somewhere in the unseen realm (postmodern pantheism), then there is no ‘chooser,’ no ‘me, myself, and I.’ This means that though there be a body, there is no one home, so to speak.
One more point: though proud Darwinians deny possession, they are in reality unwittingly confessing to their own ‘possession’ by unseen forces or energies within the unseen realm. Pride goes before a fall.
LOL!...Excellent point! Darwinists are possessed ping :o)
Thank you so much for sharing your insights!
According to Darwinians (and marxists) either genes make you do everything you do, or the environment makes you do what you do, or a combination of both. Forget free will. And so a Darwinian may indeed believe he is possessed by not one, but thousands of little demons he calls "genes", and not only that but invisible non-corporeal devils called memes as well. It may be a little different for a marxist, who says that historical forces determine what sort of pizza you will choose to eat tomorrow. Solzhenitsyn said that "nature vs nurture" were two sides of the same materialistic coin. We should reject this false dichotomy. It is one of the many wearisome controversies forced on people by Darwinians, marxists, and other ismatic loons.
First, as to Adam and the Fall and inherited sin. Evolution, historical research, and scientific criticism have disposed of Adam. Adam was a myth. Hardly any educated Christians now regard him as an historic person. But -- no Adam, no Fall; no Fall, no Atonement; no Atonement, no Saviour. Accepting Evolution, how can we believe in a Fall? When did man fall? Was it before he ceased to be a monkey, or after? Was it when he was a tree man, or later? Was it in the Stone Age, or the Bronze Age, or in the Age of Iron? There never was any "Fall." Evolution proves a long, slow rise. And if there never was a Fall, why should there be any Atonement? Christians accepting the theory of evolution have to believe that God allowed the sun to form out of the nebula, and the earth to form from the sun. That He allowed man to develop slowly from the speck of protoplasm in the sea. That at some period of man's gradual evolution from the brute, God found man guilty of some sin, and cursed him. That some thousands of years later God sent His only Son down upon the earth to save man from Hell. But Evolution shows man to be, even now, an imperfect creature, an unfinished work, a building still undergoing alterations, an animal still evolving... (pg. 124)Are we to believe that the God who created all this boundless universe got so angry with the children of the apes that He condemned them all to Hell for two score centuries, and then could only appease His rage by sending His own Son to be nailed upon a cross ? Do you believe that? Can you believe it? No. As I said before, if the theory of evolution be true, there was nothing to atone for, and nobody to atone. Man has never sifined against God. In fact, the whole of this old Christian doctrine is a mass of error. There was no creation. There was no Fall. There was no Atonement. There was no Adam, and no Eve, and no Eden, and no Devil, and no Hell. (pg. 125)
For whereas the Christian theory of free will and personal responsibility results in established ignorance and injustice, with no visible remedies beyond personal denunciation, the prison, and a few coals and blankets, the Determinist method would result in the abolition of lords and burglars, of slums and palaces, of caste and snobbery. There would be no ignorance and no poverty left in the world. That is because the Determinist understands human nature, and the Christian does not. It is because the Determinist understands morality, and the Christian does not. For the Determinist looks for the cause of wrong-doing in the environment of the wrong-doer. While the Christian puts all the wrongs which society perpetrates against the individual, and all the wrongs which the individual perpetrates against his fellows down to an imaginary "free will." (pg. 142--144)