Have you ever wondered why Charles Darwin wrote On the Origen of the Species? Did he really believe what he tried so hard to prove? And what drives others to so passionately uphold his theories? What does The Discovery Channel, for instance, have to gain by airing his propaganda?
We can find the answers by studying Darwin’s writings. Tom DeRosa has done a wonderful job compiling excerpts from Darwin in his book Evolution’s Fatal Fruit, which I will use in this post.
Darwin was once a seminary student, and there was a time when, according to his Autobiography, he was an “Orthodox Christian.” He was studying to give his life in defense of the Scriptures, so what accounted for the change in his life?
Near the end of his life Darwin wrote, “I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. This is a damnable doctrine.”
There you have it. Darwin could not stand the thought of his father, brother, and best friends in hell, so he set out to disprove the whole lot of Christianity.
When he worked so hard to try to convince the world that his theory was correct, he was trying even harder to convince himself. While criticizing Christianity in his Autobiography for having to “invent evidence,” he didn’t exactly seem too sure of himself in his own On the Origen of the Species. That work is rife with speculative phrases such as, “we may suppose,” “if we suppose,” “we have only to suppose,” “we suppose,” “let us suppose,” “let us now suppose,” and “now if we suppose.”
He doesn’t exactly seem very sure of himself. This reads more like wishful thinking from someone with an agenda than it does a confident treatise of a sure scientist.
In essence, according to DeRosa, Darwin was asking, “How can God condemn me, my father, my grandfather, and almost all my friends? Who is this God that can judge me? Something of his inner soul comes into view here. He was unwilling to acknowledge the Creator and crafted a theory to replace him with evolution.”
Replacing the Creator with evolution does more than erase the first two chapters of Genesis; it launches an all out assault on the entirety of the Bible. If the opening pages are wrong, then how can we trust the pages that contain the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus?
Now a century later, millions of people have followed suit. People who do not want a Judge have simply dismissed Him. People who refuse to bow their knee in surrender to the Lord have done away with Him. People who want to live however they want without a God looking over their shoulder have denied Him. And all of this is possible because of Darwin’s theory.
So Darwinism can be boiled down to this advertisement: Don’t want a God, Lord, or Judge? No problem; just deny the Creator.
As we can see, this is a far cry from science. In fact, much of what Darwin wrote has since been disproved. The man that he said he agreed with and was influenced by has been a proven fraud. Darwinism is not science, for science must be observable and repeatable. No, Darwinism is philosophy and religion, but not science.
If you choose to believe in Darwinism, do it realizing that you are embracing a religion that was crafted to do away with the notion of hell, not a science that was studied to answer the origin of species.