One way of discovering the true nature of a theory is to study its ‘roots and fruits’— that is, its origins and consequences. We shall see in this article that evolution’s origins are anti-Christian and anti-biblical, and its consequences appear to be uniformly evil. There are several reasons why Christians should oppose the theory of evolution, and these are just two of them.
The idea of evolution is actually very old. The pagan Greeks, for example, wrote about it some 2,700 years ago. But the modern theory, together with the present-day concept of vast periods of time, has its roots in the anti-Christian ‘Enlightenment’ of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. (The same is true of liberal theology.) Many of the pioneers of these ideas were deists. Deists do not believe in divine revelation; so they do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God. Their ‘god’ is very different from the God of the Bible. He/it is a remote being who started the universe, but left it to run itself, operating according to natural laws.1
Various theories were put forward, resulting eventually in the full-blown long ages, anti-Flood geology of Charles Lyell (1797–1875) and then the theory of evolution of Charles Darwin (1809–1882). Lyell was a deist who wanted to “free the science [geology] from Moses”.2 He was greatly influenced by another deist, James Hutton (1726–1797). Hutton proposed a radical uniformitarianism in which he insisted that only present-day processes at present-day frequencies and magnitudes should be used to interpret the rock record—and Lyell developed this idea further.3
Darwin studied theology for a time, but he turned against Christianity and became a deist or possibly an agnostic.4 He was much influenced by Charles Lyell, and by his own grandfather, Erasmus Darwin (1731–1802), who was an anti-Christian deist and evolutionist.
Charles Darwin’s theory did not arise primarily out of his scientific observations. He accepted the deistic, uniformitarian worldview of his friend and mentor, Charles Lyell, and then he interpreted the data in accordance with that worldview.5
Thus the roots of these ideas (of vast ages and evolution) are clearly anti-biblical and anti-Christian.
What about the fruits of these ideas? The list of evil fruits seems almost endless. They catalogue untold misery and suffering. Whole nations and societies—countless millions of people—have been affected for evil. Science itself has been corrupted and its progress hindered.6
The theory of evolution (with the billions of years that it requires) is the foundational belief of secular humanism (atheism). It enables humanists to deny the existence of God and their accountability to Him. It means that they can create their own standard of morality and do “what is right in their own eyes” (cf. Judges 21:25).
Nations and societies which adopt this evolutionary philosophy see a breakdown of family life, broken homes, sexual immorality, lack of respect for the sanctity of human life (including that of the unborn child) and increasing crime. The theory of evolution is foundational to the doctrines of Marxism and Nazism, which produced the cold-blooded murder of millions. These murders include 77 million in Communist China, 62 million in the Soviet Gulag State, 2 million in the Khmer Rouge killing fields and 21 million non-battle killings by the Nazis.7
It is the basis of the most appalling practices of eugenics (the ‘science’ of ensuring superior human populations). This included Hitler’s killing of many disabled people, and the forced sterilization of hundreds of thousands, including many thousands in the USA.8
It has also fuelled racism of various kinds, involving the ruthless elimination of those regarded as inferior.9 Australian aboriginals, for example, were slaughtered because they were considered to be subhuman.10
The theory of evolution has also contributed to the loss of faith or lack of faith of millions. Witness the millions of atheists and agnostics in countries that used to be ‘Christian’, but have been or are dominated by communism or secular humanism. There are countless stories of individuals brought up in Christian homes who say they lost their faith through evolutionary teaching.
Another fruit of the ideas of vast ages and evolution is the tendency to slide into ‘liberal’ theology. This entails dismissing Genesis as history, which undermines the very notion of salvation in Jesus Christ, “the last Adam”.
Many Christians share my view that the theory of evolution, together with its billions of years, is actually a satanic deception. Jesus said,
The fruits borne by the theory of evolution are uniformly bad, but the fruits borne by believing the biblical account, consistently applied, are uniformly good. Belief in the biblical account has effects which are the exact opposite of those caused by belief in evolution. For example, it discourages racism. According to the Bible, all human beings are closely related, being descended from Adam via Noah, who lived less than five thousand years ago.11 It also encourages the advance of science, because it accepts that the whole creation has been wonderfully designed by a rational God.12
But what about Christians who accept the theory of evolution and/or billions of years, and try to reconcile them with Scripture? One clergyman who is a theistic evolutionist said to me, “Darwin did not know that Hitler and Stalin would use the theory of evolution to justify their actions”. It is true that Lyell and Darwin did not foresee the full consequences of their theories, but they could have guessed. After all, the full title of Darwin’s book is On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and in The Descent of Man, he wrote:
The important thing to understand is that Lyell and Darwin were deliberately seeking to exclude God from science, and they knew very well that their theories would destroy belief in the Bible, the God of the Bible and the morality rooted in the Bible.15
Some Christians say that Darwin’s theory cannot be hostile to Christianity, because he mentioned the Creator in his book. However, this concept is totally foreign to the entire ethos of the Origin, so the mentions would appear to have been “a sop to mollify the Christian community”.16 E.g. Darwin added his famous words ‘by the Creator’ (in the last sentence of the book) to the 2nd (1860) and later editions of Origin. But privately, in a letter to Joseph Hooker, dated March 1863, he wrote, “ … I have long regretted that I truckled to public opinion & used the Pentateuchal term of creation, by which I really meant ‘appeared’ by some wholly unknown process.”17 As mentioned, Darwin himself was anti-Christian, and to the extent that his thinking may have included a deistic ‘God’, it was not the God of Christianity.
Another very common response is to say that evolution is simply a biological process, and the Nazis, Marxists and others misused the theory to justify their actions. There is nothing wrong, such Christians say, with the process itself. But this argument is illogical and unbiblical. The theory’s evil fruits are bound up in its very nature. If God created by means of evolution, it means that He used a process of millions of years of death, disease, violence, suffering and waste. And it involves the ruthless elimination of the weak by the strong. If God used such methods, why shouldn’t we? In fact, Nazis and Marxists thought that they were just emulating nature in their ruthlessness. Adolf Eichmann, the Nazi war criminal who masterminded the deaths of millions, was saturated in evolutionary thinking, and believed that his actions were not merely defensible—they were commendable. He was cooperating with nature, improving the human race.18
Actually, the scientific evidence against microbes-to-man evolution is so powerful that the theory of evolution has no right to be called a ‘theory’. Scientists normally use this word to mean a well-substantiated explanation of the data. An example is Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. The theory of evolution is really just a hypothesis based on a naturalistic worldview and a naturalistic definition of science—the arbitrary assumption that everything can and must be explained without reference to God and the supernatural.
The ‘roots and fruits’ of the theory of evolution indicate very clearly that it is a satanic deception. The Bible’s teaching supports this conclusion, as do the real facts of science. A further indication is the fact that ‘the world’ seems to have a special hatred for biblical creation. It does everything in its power to exclude and suppress it, and to impose the evolutionary worldview. Some Christians may believe in evolution and/or millions of years, but that does not change the unpleasant facts described in this article, nor the implications of those facts.
CMI: You don’t seem to have read the article very carefully. The article traces the roots of the idea and the consequences. Ravi Zacharias has said that we can judge a world-view by the hearts of those who promote it and it is clear that evolution had its roots in those who hated God as Creator and Redeemer. The consequences are also not inconsequential; they are a product of the idea, not an abuse of it. Eugenics, for example, was a Darwin family business. Darwin himself promoted the basic ideas. Hitler was just applying Darwinism to politics.We must not forget that Scripture and Christian teaching have been used as the basis for terrible atrocities. Do we throw out the baby of Christianity with the bathwater of the the KKK or Salem Witch Trials? Of course not. We recognize that one need not lead to the other. Evolution is the same way.
CMI: KKK Christian? Scriptural? Hardly! Its founder, David Duke, abandoned the Bible’s teaching on origins and imbibed evolutionary notions of origins, within which his racism was able to flourish. (So, ironically, the KKK is yet another fruit of evolution!).
CMI: "Scripture and Christian teaching … the basis for" the Salem witch trials? This is also incorrect. It was ignorance of the Bible’s teaching that led to these. It was the biblical teaching of an out-of-town Puritan pastor that eventually stopped the horrors in the civil court. He pointed out that none of the 'evidence' being put forward met biblical criteria.Furthermore, it is a genetic fallacy that is being committed in this article. By attacking the alleged sources of evolutionary thought, the validity of evolution itself isn't really being attacked. "Bad" people have good ideas all the time.
CMI: see above. If the intent of the originators and promoters was evil, then the worldview is legitimately criticized on that basis. And when its consequences are as its originators and promoters intended (the weakening of Christianity), then it is hardly the genetic fallacy. Futhermore, this article is in the context of creation.com that provides abundant evidence against "evolution itself"; see Created or evolved? for example, but there are many hundreds of other articles dealing with evolution in virtually every aspect (there are over 8,000 articles on creation.com).The real weakness of this article is, in my estimation, its documentation. Are there no outside sources available to substantiate the claims made here? Or is creation.com only able to supply its own biased view without referencing those who would disagree?
CMI: Ironically, this sounds like the genetic fallacy. ‘I won’t take any notice of what you say, because you are biased’? You have to do better than that and actually engage with the articles and show where they are wrong. You have not even done this with this article, Roots and Fruits. If you care to actually read the referenced articles, you will find that they cite many external sources.Christians need not fear evolution. I highly recommend the resources at BioLogos that help clarify the relationship between biblical Christianity and the theory of evolution.
CMI: I hope you are ignorant of the dreadful consequences of Biologos’ promotion of compromise with the atheists' creation myth, which undermines virtually all major doctrines of the Bible. If you are aware of these consequences, then your recommendation is evil. If you are not aware of these, I suggest you read some critiques of Biologos' position, such as "It's not Christianity!" and 'related reading' at the end of the article. And I wonder how many references Biologos give to the critiques of their teaching? And how unbiased are they? Or perhaps people you agree with are unbiased whereas people you disagree with are biased? :-) Please think about these things; everything is at stake.