The Commoner
MARCH, 1922
vmI'
. ncr that a Christian 'will accept Darwinism
8traf Substitute for the Bible when the Bible
flV nnlv does not support Darwin's hypothesis
St directly and expressly contradicts it?
rrhlrd' Neither Darwin nor his supporters
t. hPBn able to find a fact in the universe
? MTOort their hypothesis. With millions of
Mnq the investigators have not been able to
And ONE SINGLE INSTANCE in which, one
cnpcies has changed into another although, ac
Sine to the hypothesis, ALL species have de
vPlonod from one of a few germs of life, the
Jfivelopment being through the action of "resi
dent forces" and without outside aid. Wher
ever a form of life, found in the rocks, is found
among living organisms there is no material
change from the earliest form; in which it is
found WitliV millions of examples nothing im
perfect is found nothing in the process of
change. This statement may surprise those who
have accepted evolution without investigation,
as most of those who call themselves evolution
ists have done. One preacher who wrote to mo
expressing great regret that I should dissent
from Darwin said that he had not investigated
the matter for himself but that nearly . all
scientists seemed to accept Darwinism.
The latest word that we have on this subject,
comes from Professor Bateson, a high English
authority, who journeyed all the way from Lon
don to Toronto, Canada, to address the American
Association for the Advancement of Science the
twenty-eighth day of last December. His speech
has been published in full in the January issue
of "Science." Professor Bateson is an evolu-
tionist but ho tells with real pathos how every
effort to discover the origin of species has failed.
Ho takes up different lines of investigation,
commenced hopefully but ending in disappoint
ment. He concludes by saying, "Let us then
proclaim in precise and unmistakable language
that our faith in evolution is unshaken" and
then he adds "our- doubts are not as to the
reality or truth of evolution but as to the origin
of species, a technical, almost domestic problem.
Any day that mystery may be solved," Here
is optimism at its maximunn They fall back
on faith. They have not yet found the origin .
of species, and yet how can evolution explain life
unless it can account for change in species? Is
it not more rational to believe in Creation of.
man by separate act of God than to believe in
evolution without a particle of evidence?
Fourth: Darwinism is not only without
foundation but it compels its believers to re
sort to explanations that are more absurd than
anything found in the Arabian nights. Darwin
explains ' that man's mind became superior to
woman's because, .among our brute ancestors,
the males fought for the females and thus
strengthened their minds. If he had lived until
now he would not have felt it necessary to make
so ridiculous an explanation because woman's
mind is not now believed to be inferior to man's.
Darwin also' explained that the hair disap
peared from the body, permitting man to be
come a hairless animal, because, . among our
brute ancestors,' the females preferred the males'
with the least hair and thus, in the course of
ages, bred the hair off. It is hardly necessary
to point out that these explanations conflict; the
males and the females could not both select at
the same time.
Evolutionists, not being willing to accept the
theory of creation, have to explain everything
and their courage in this respect is as great 'as
their efforts are laughable. The eye, for in
stance, according to evolutionists, was brought
out by "the light beating upon the skin;" the
ear came out in response to '-air waves;" the
Jeg is the development of a wart that chanced
to appear on the belly of an animal; and so the
tommyrot runs on ad infinitum, and sensible
People are asked to swallow it.
Recently a college professor, told an audience
m Philadelphia that a baby wiggles its big toe
without wiggling its other toes because its ari
cestonj climbed trees, also that we dream of
lailing because our forefathers fell out of trees
jjity thousand years ago, adding that we are
ot hurt in our dreams of falling because we
y.escended from those that fell and were NOT
JULLED. (Jf we descended from animals at all
ZQ ce,rtainly did not descend from those that
were killed in falling), A professor in Illinois
"as fixed as the great day in history the day
Vf a water puppy crawled Upon the land and
ueciaed to stay there, thus becoming man's first
Progenitor. A dispatch from Paris recently an
nounced that an eminent scientist' had reported
"avrng communicated with the soul of a dog
and learned that the' dog was happy,
ww ply lnention these explanations to show
in 01ne PQPle can- believe who cannot be
hllt . Bible.. Evolution seems to close, the
"eart of some to the plainest spiritual truths
while it opens the mind to the wildest of jubsaori
advanced in the name. of science.'
in?Uvf , 5re h0K sctenc6- ScIence is classi
fied knowledge and a scientist ought to bo the
,ffnP rS01i t0 insi8t upon a SUGSS bein& accepted
until proof removes it from the field of hypothe
sis into the field of demonstrated truth. Chrls-
nit5rUas notlling to fear from any TRUTH
ou JhCT diTsrbs, the Christian religion or the
,?i ?!? , is tho unsupported GUESS that is
substituted for science to which opposition is
made and I think tho objection i a valid one.
But, it may bo asked, why should ono object
mTSrWimsm EVEN THOUGH' IT IS NOT
TRUE? This is a proper question! and deserves
a candid answer. . There are many guesses which
are perfectly, groundless and at the. same time
entirely harmless; and it is not worth while to
worry about: a giiess or to disturb the guesser
so long as. his guess does not harm others.
The objection to Darwinism is that it is
HARMFUL, as well as groundless. It entire
ly changes one's view of life and undermines
faith in the Bible. Evolution has no placo for
the miracle or the supernatural. It flatters tho
egotist to be told that there Is nothing that his
mind cannot understand. Evolution proposes to
bring all the processes of nature within tho
comprehension of man by making it tho explana
tion of everything that is known. Creation im
plies a Creator and the finite mind cannot com
prehend the Infinite. We can understand some
tilings but we run across mystery at every point.
Evolution attempts to solve the mystery of life
by suggesting a process of development com
mencing "in the dawn of time" and continuing
uninterrupted up until now. Evolution does not
oxplain creation; it simply diverts attention
from it by hiding it behind eons of time. If a
man accepts Darwinism or evolution applied
to man, and is consistent, he reiects the miracle
and the supernatural as impossible. He com
mences with the first chapter of Genesis and
blots, out tho Bible story of man's creation, not
because the evidence is insufficient but because
the miracle is inconsistent with evolution. If
he Is consistent ho will go through the Old
Testament step by step and cut out all tho mira
cles, and all the supernatural, Ho will then
take up the New Testament and cut out all tho
supernatural the virgin birth of Christ, His
miracles and His resurrection, leaving the Bible
a story book without binding authority upon the
conscience of man. Of course, not all evolu
tionists are consistent; some fail to apply their
hypothesis to the end just as some Christians
fail to apply their Christianity to life.
Most of the evolutionists are materialists;
some1 admitting that they are atheists, others
calling themselves agnostics. Some call them
sejves "Theistic Evolutionists" but the theistic
evolutionist puts God so far away that He ceases
to be a present influence in the life. Canon
Barnes of Westminister some two years ago so
interpreted evolution as to put God back of the
time when the eloctrons came out of stuff and
combined (about 1740 of them) to form an
atom. Since then, according to Canon Barnes,
things have been devolping according to God's
plan but without God's aid.
It requires measureless credulity to enable ono
to believe that all that we see about us came by
chance, by a series of happy-go-lucky accidents.
If only an infinite God could have formed hydro
gen and oxygen and united them in just the
right proportions to produce water the daily
need of every living thing scattered among the
flowers all the colors of the rainbow and every
variety of perfume, adjusted the mocking-bird's
throat to its musical scale, and fashioned a
soul for man, why should we want to imprison
God in an impenetrable past? This is a living
world. Why not a LIVING God upon the
throne? Why not allow Him to work NOW?
Theistic evolutionists insist that they magnify
God when they credit Him with devising evolu-
tion as a plan of development. They sometimes
characterize the Bible God as a "carpenter god"
who is described as repairing his work from
time to time at man's request. The question
is not whether God COULD HAVE made the
world according to the plan of evolution of
course an all powerful God could make the
world as He pleased. The real question i? DID
GOD USE EVOLUTION AS HIS PLAN? If it
could be shown that man, instead of bein
made in the image of God, is a development of
beasts we would have to accept it, regardless of
u Pffact for truth is truth and must prevail.
But when there is NO PROOF we have a right
to consider the EFFECT of the acceptance of
anDrSmemadttneagnostic out of Darwin.
whS he Si a young man he believed in God;
worn he dild he declared that the beginning
Sf all things is a mystery insoluble by us. When
Ho waajfl y,oung;man ho believed, in -&e Bible;?
Just bofbfd his death ho declared ?that hd 'did
not bellovo that there had over been any revela
tion: that banished the Bible as the inspired
Word of God and, with it, tho Christ of whom .
tho Bible tolls. Whon Darwin was young ho
believed in a futuro life; before ho died ho
declared that each must decide the question for
himself from vague, uncertain probabilities He
could not throw any light upon tho great ques
tions of life and Immortality. Ho said that ho
"must bo contont to remain an agnostic,"
And then he brought the most terrific indict
ment that I have read against his own hypoth
esis. Ho asks (just before his death); "Can
tho mind of man, which has, as I fully believe,
been developed from a mind as low as that
possossed by the lowest animal, bo trusted when
it draws such grand conclusions?" Ho brought
man down to. tho brute levol and then judged
man's mind by bruto standards.
This is DARWINISM. This is Darwin's own
testimony against himself. If Darwinism could
make an agnostic of Darwin what is its effect
likely to bo upon students to whom Darwinism
is taught at tho very ago whon they are throw
ing off parental authority and becoming inde
pendent? Darwin's guess gives tho student an
excuse for rejecting the authority of God, an ex
cuse that appeals to him more strongly at this
age than at any other age in life. Many of them
come back after a while as Romanes camo back. .
After feeding upon husks for twenty-five years
he began to feel his way back, like a prodigal
son, to his father's house, but many never re
turn. Professor Louba, who teaches psychology at
Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, wrote a book about
six years ago, entitled "Belief in God and Im
mortality" (it can bo obtained from tho Open
Court Publishing Company, Chicago) In which
he declared that belief In God and Immortality
is dying out among the educated classes. As
proof of this- he gavo the results which ho ob
tained by submitting questions to the prominent
scientists in tho United States. He says that ho
found that more than half of them, accord-
ing to their own answers, do not believe In a
personal God or a personal immortality. To
reenforco his position; ho sent questions to stu
dents of nine representative colloges and found
that unbelief increases from fifteen per cent in.
the Freshman year to thirty per con't In tho
Junior class and to forty to forty-five per cent .
(among the men) at graduation. This ho at
tributes to the influence of tho scholarly mon
under whoso instruction they pass in college.
Anyone desiring to verify those statistics can
do so by inquiry at our leading stato institu
tions and even among some of our religious
denominational colleges. Fathers and mothers
complain of their children losing their Interest
in religion and speaking lightly of the Bible.
This begins when they come under tho influ
ence of a teacher who accepts Darwin's guess,
ridicules tho Bible story of creation and in
structs the child upon the basis of the brute
theory. In Columbia a teacher began
his course in geology by telling the chil
dren to lay aside all that they hail learned in
Sunday School. A teacher of philosophy Jn the
University of Michigan tells students that Chris
tianity is a state of mind and that there aro
only two books of literary value in the Bible.
Another professor In that university tells stu
dents that no thinking man can believe in God
or in the Bible. A teaclier in the University of
Wisconsin ' tells his students that the Bible fs
a collection of myths. Another state university
professor diverts a dozen young men from the
ministry and the president of a prominent state
university tells his students IN A LECTURE ON
RELIGION to throw away religion if it does not
harmonize with the teaching of biology,
psychology, etc.
The effect of Darwinism is seen in the pul
pits; men of prominent denominations deny the
virgin birth of Christ and some even His resur
rection.. Two Presbyterians, preaching in New
York State, recently told me that agnosticism
was tho natural attitude of old people, Evolu
tion naturally leads to agnosticism and, if con
tinued, finally to' atheism. Those who teach
Darwinism are undermining the faith of Chris
tians; they are raising questions about tho Bible
as an authoritatiye source of truth. , Thev are
teaching materialistic views that rob the ) if e of
the young of spiritual values.
Christians do not -object to freedom of speech ?
they believe that Biblical truth can- hold its
own In a fair field. .They concede , the right r
of ministers to pags from belief to agnosticism
or atheism, but they contend that they should
be honest enough to separate themselves from
m
&
' &
.
M
m
' fit '
f
Bl
4
Jt
-wA
'
.:":
-,.
ft
t
"A
ft
'tv.F
.: w
twM
'l
.m
i!3
i1
i'
'.Vf
' y
'J,Tf
:r'UM
!
r.'Li.
' M
1
""" . -- - -- .-