Charles Darwin and the Theory of Evolution (continued)

That Darwin was not simply posing some slight variations in truths that had been believed for centuries is evident when one considers the fact that in 1871 The Descent of Man was published by Darwin, This book took a much longer step in the same fundamentally wrong direction which had been taken in the Origin of Species. The implications of the theory of natural selection and the survival of the fittest become manifestly clear in this later book of Darwin. In this book, The Descent of Man, Darwin denies that man’s sense of right and wrong is God-given and he concludes that man has descended from some lowly form of life.

“The main conclusion arrived at in this work, namelv. that man is descended from some lowly organized form, will, I regret to think, be highly distasteful to many. But there can hardly be a doubt that we are descended from barbarians. The astonishment which I felt on first seeing a party of Fuegians on a wild and broken shore will never be forgotten by me, for the reflection at once rushed into my mind — such were our ancestors. These men were absolutely naked and bedaubed with paint, their long hair tangled, their mouths frothed with excitement, and their expression was wild, startled, and distrustful. They possessed hardly any arts, and like wild animals lived on what they could catch; they had no government, and were merciless to everyone not of their own small tribe. He who has seen a savage in his native land will not feel much shame, if forced to acknowledge that the blood of some more humble creature flows in his veins. For my own part I would as soon be descended from that heroic little monkey, who braved his dreaded enemy in order to save the life of his keeper, or from that old baboon, who descended from the mountains, carried away in triumph his young comrade from a crowd of astonished dogs — as from a savage who delights to torture his enemies, offers up blood, sacrifices, practices infanticide without remorse, treats his wives like slaves, knows no decency, and is haunted by the grossest superstitions.

Men may be excused for feeling some ride at having risen, though not through his own exertions, to the very summit of the organic scale; and the fact of his having been aboriginally placed there, may give him hope for a still higher destiny in the distant future. But we are not here concerned with hopes or fears, only with the truth as far as our reason permits us to discover it; and I have given the evidence to the best: of my ability. We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system —with all these exalted powers — Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin.”

For anyone who understands and believes the Scriptural account concerning the origin of man, that which Darwin writes must be abhorrent. It should be completely obvious that herein Darwin is a blasphemer. It is as if he sits on the lap of the Sovereign of heaven and earth — the Sovereign who sustains all things by his providence — and gives to that Sovereign an outright slap in the face.

Principles work through. Anyone who wishes to hang his hopes on one tread of the evidence that science pretends to submit concerning the origin of man is doomed. He is doomed both spiritually and ethically. He is on the broad road that leads to destruction.

To deny the popularity of theory of evolution and the working out of this theory by Darwin is simply gross folly. One has simply to take into account the overwhelming number of the intellectual elite who consider it gross foolishness to believe the Scriptural account of earth history. Darwin s Origin of Species was tremendously successful in terms of sales. Sixteen thousand copies were sold in seventeen years. What he said was revolutionary and affected every area of education.

Philosophers and scientists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century adopted Darwinism. Darwinism is not dead today, either. Scientists were looking for a plausible theory that would eliminate the Creator. Thomas H. Huxley said; “The Origin of Species provided us with the working hypothesis we sought. Moreover, it did us the immense service of freeing us forever from the dilemma — refuse to accept the Creation hypothesis and what have you to propose that can be accepted by any cautious reasoner?”

Wilbert H. Rusch, professor of science, at Concordia Teachers College in Seward, Nebraska, is one of the contributors to book Darwin, Evolution, and Creation, edited by Paul A. Zimmerman. He concludes concerning Darwin as follows:

“… it seems as if Darwin s prime claim to fame lies in this, that at the precise time when fear and dislike of God was on the increase he happened to synthesize the previous evolutionary theories into a single presentation, clothing it in a hypothesis that seemed adequate to explain the marvelous adaptation of living things, by the mere action of natural forces, without the necessity of bringing in divine intervention.”