In the first discussion of this subject ample evidence was furnished confirming the atheistic basis of evolution. The progenitors of the theory admit to this fact, and their outlook is wholly antagonistic to the Bible account of creation. The fact that their theory cannot be proved scientifically and therefore remains mere hypothesis has not resulted in any diminution of their theorising. Their unfounded claims are carried forward to the highest counsels in a flood of literature, and supported by scientists, teachers, lecturers and clergy. The impact of this unproved theory upon young minds in the process of learning has been tremendous.
H. Huxley, the great agnostic and evolutionist of the last century, issued a series of essays in 1894 under the title “Science and the Christian Tradition”, writes “London Journalist”, and he quotes from page 33 of that book: “My purpose in the essay which treats of the narrative of the Deluge was to prove by physical criticism that no such event as that described ever took place; to exhibit the untrustworthy character of the narrative demonstrated by literary criticism . . .”
These words of Huxley are proved to be absurd and empty by the scientific ,analysis of Dr. Leonard Woolley, one of the greatest names in archaeology. In his meticulous investigations over a period of time, Dr. Woolley was rewarded with an astounding discovery that has been accepted and valued by all those who have regard for truth, especially the Word of God. In his book, “Ur of the Chaldees”, we read something of interest:
“The shafts went deeper and suddenly the character of the soil changed. Instead of the stratified pottery and rubbish we were in perfectly clean clay, uniform throughout, the texture of which showed that it had been laid there by water. The workmen declared we had come to the bottom of everything, to the river silt I sent the men back to deepen the hole. The clean clay continued without change until it had attained a thickness of a little over 8 feet. Then, as suddenly as it had begun, it stopped, and we were at once more in layers of rubbish full of stone implements and pottery. . . . The great bed of clay marked, if it did not cause a break in, the continuity of history; above it we had the pure Sumerian civilisation slowly developing on its own lines; below it there was a mixed culture . . . no ordinary rising of the rivers would leave behind it anything approaching the bulk of this clay bank; 8 feet of sediment imply a very great depth of water, and the flood which deposited it must have been of a magnitude unparalleled in local history. That it was so is further proved by the fact that the clay bank marks a definite break in the continuity of the local culture; a whole civilisation which existed before it is lacking above it and seems to have been submerged by the waters . . . there could be no doubt that the flood was the flood of Sumerian history and legend, the flood on which is based the story of Noah.”
Evolutionary indoctrination has been on such a scale that it is difficult to get a proper hearing when speaking against it. “London Journalist” gives a blatant example of this in his book: “Just imagine, for instance, the feelings of Professor MacBride who had the temerity, before the British Association at their meeting at Norwich, to suggest that: ‘The doctrine of natural selection as the cause of evolution to my mind is a complete fraud.’
As soon as he resumed his seat, Sir E. D. Poulton followed by saying: ‘We feel admiration and courage for a man who stands up against the opinion of practically the whole biological world. We must feel a certain admiration for the pelican in the wilderness. We accord the pelican every admiration for its courage, but we do not follow it in its opinions’.”
The writer also throws light on the so-called impartiality of the B.B.C. He declares: “In spite of hundreds of letters of protest the B.B.C. allows the most blatant evolutionist propaganda. In reply to a recent request by the Evolution Protest Movement to allow the opposite point of view to be given, they replied that they would be prepared to consider such a broadcast if given by `a scientist of repute’. LieutColonel L. M. Davies was put forward, and the B.B.C. agreed that he was `a scientist of repute.’
However, having received the manuscript of the talk, the B.B.C. sent it to professor A. E. Trueman, a fanatical evolutionist, for comment, and although Trueman could not refute the facts put forward by Davies he would not allow it to be broadcast because it would `mislead’ the public and `confuse’ them as to the ‘actual state of affairs….
In vain does the philosophy of man range itself against the Word of God. The wisdom of man is but foolishness and vanity in the eyes of God. Science and philosophy seek to emancipate man from all allegiance to the commandments of God, “. . . teaching for doctrines the commandments of men”. The Bible long ago predicted the latter day pursuit of knowledge, and the quick modes of travel: “. . . many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”
The magnitude of the creation in all its wonder and perfection defies any other explanation than as an act of God. Nature itself in its varied magnificence commends but one thought to the thinking man—a Supreme Intelligence planned it and controls it. No other explanation is possible. The Psalmist says: “He bath skewed his people the power of his works, that he may give them the heritage of the heathen.”
Evolution is an unproved hypothesis, a proposition formulated in unbelief, vainly trying to impose man’s thinking on minds not tempered by the Word of God. Paul in his travels experienced the evils of vain philosophy in the things that he saw, especially in Athens, and he warns continually against depravity and spiritual declension: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrine of devils.”
Prof. P. Lemoine, Director of the Museum of Natural History in Paris says: “The theory of evolution is impossible. . . . Evolution is a kind of dogma which the priests no longer believe, but which they maintain for their people.” The professor is only saying what the Bible has said for hundreds of years.
Dr. Etheridge, former examiner of the British Museum, and one of the great fossil experts of modern times, said: “In all this great museum there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of these views.”
The Bible abounds with evidence that God created all things. The Patriarchs, Prophets, Christ and the Apostles were all singleminded on this point, so that from Genesis to Revelation we find this consistent pattern of truth. The Bible remains our sole authority, a sure Word in a world where spiritual values are discredited and abandoned for a materialistic philosophy that rejects God. Isaiah, under inspiration, ascribes the miracle of creation to God: “Thus saith the Lord. . . . I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.”
In speaking of the latter day tribulation Christ alludes to the creation, in words that are unmistakably clear: “For in those days shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be.” The weight of Bible testimony must surely commend itself to all who would investigate the Scriptures with a genuine desire to find truth. “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.”
“London Journalist” quotes the words of the famous evolutionist Professor Julian Huxley, taken from the latter’s book, “Science and Religion”: “Science insists on continual verification by testing against facts, because the bitter experience of history is that without such constant testing man’s imagination and logical faculty run away with him and in the long run make a fool of him.” Huxley’s words can be used against himself and all who think as he does.
“London Journalist” quotes Darwin’s own words contained in, “Life and Letters”, vol. 3, page 25: “There are two or three million of species on earth, sufficient field one might think for observation. But it must be said to-day that in spite of all the efforts of trained observers, not one change of a species into another is on record.”
The Journalist quotes extracts from Darwin’s, “Origin of Species”, some of which are appended hereunder:
Page 2: “I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions, directly opposite to those at which I have arrived.”
Page 15: “I think it could be shown that this statement is hardly correct; but naturalists differ most widely in determining what characters are of generic value; all such valuations being at present empirical.”
Page 17: “I do not think it possible to come to any definite conclusion—
“The whole subject must, I think, remain vague—”
Page 5: “No one ought to feel surprise at much remaining as yet unexplained in regard to the origin of species and varieties, if he makes due allowance for our profound ignorance in regard to the mutual relations of all beings which live around us. Who can explain why one species ranges widely and is very numerous, and why another allied species has a narrow range and is rare? . . . Still less do we know of the mutual relations of the innumerable inhabitants of the world during the many past geological epochs in its history. Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgment of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists entertain and which I formerly entertained—namely, that each species has been independently created—is erroneous.”
In his two principal books Darwin uses the phrase, “we may well suppose”, more than 800 times. Comment is hardly necessary except to say that all who blindly follow this delusion must be blind indeed. Christ used apt phrases in describing the Pharisees, words which could be applied to evolutionists: ‘Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”
“London Journalist” also quotes extracts from, “Evolution of Man”, a book written by Haeckel, the eminent follower of Darwin. We find the same pattern of supposition, assumption and hypothesis:
“The evidence on which we build is imperfect and always will be imperfect.”
“The first of our documents, palaeontology (evidence of fossils), is exceedingly incomplete.”
“The second source of evidence, ontogeny (development of individual organisms), is not less incomplete.”
“The recapitulation of phylogeny (history of descent from other living creatures in bygone days) by ontogeny is . . . never wholly complete.”
“Finally, the third and most valuable source of evidence, comparative anatomy, is also, unfortunately, very imperfect.”
Let us consider the verdicts of some leading names in science that reject evolution:
Douglas Dewar, F.Z.S., author of “Difficulties of the Evolution Theory”, etc., says: “The creation theories explain the fossil record far better than do those of evolution, and, as the latter involve impossible transformation, they ought to be abandoned.”
Dr. N. Heribert Nilsson, Director of the Botanical Institute of Lund, Sweden, says: “It is obvious that the investigations of the last three decades into the problem of the origin of species have not been able to show that a variational material capable of competition in the struggle for existence is formed by mutation. Further, as it has also been impossible to demonstrate a progressive adaptation by means of a transmission of acquired characters (all the numerous experiments made have yielded negative results) we are forced to this conclusion, that the theory of evolution has not been verified by experimental investigations of the origin of species. Darwin’s Evolution has been proved to be lifeless, and probably, what is worse, to have been a fiction.”
Prof. Flieschmann, the great Zoologist, says: “The Darwinian theory has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of the imagination.”
Prof. Arthur P. Kelly, Director of the Landenburg Laboratory: “Evolution cannot exist for a moment without demonstrable transformations. But botanical phenomena provide us with no transformations—not even one. What shall we do? Shall we destroy all living plants and smash every plant fossil that can be found, in order to live comfortably with evolution? Or shall we submit to fact and give up the antiquated philosophy of Evolution which some nineteenth-century atheists dug out of barefoot Greek antiquity?”
Prof. B. M. Blair, Regius Professor of Anatomy in the University of Glasgow: “No evolutionary theory explains satisfactorily all the known facts of scientific observation, and no satisfactory demonstration or explanation has yet been given of the changes which are essential stepping-stones of any theory of evolution by descent. The increase of scientific knowledge, notably in the fields of genetics and experimental embryology, renders more than ever untenable the crude theories of the past.”
Robert Patterson, in his book, “Fables of Infidelity”, says: “We ought to find a hundred connecting links for every specimen of distinct species, since Darwin alleges that they must have lived and died somewhere. The geological strata ought to be full of connecting links, but when we come to look for them they are not there. Geology knows nothing about them. He ought to be able to overwhelm his opponents, and bury them under mountains of the bones of intermediate species. . . . Geology says there never was any such confusion of species as evolution asserts.”
Prof. Frass, one of Europe’s greatest fossil experts, is quoted in the book, “Evolution” by Graebner: “The idea that mankind has descended from any simian (ape) species whatsoever, is certainly the most foolish ever put forth by a man writing on the history of man. It should be handed down to posterity in a new edition of the ‘Memorial of Human Follies’. No proof of this baroque theory can ever be given from discovered fossils.”
Prof. Quatrefages, Professor of Anthropology in the Museum of Natural Sciences, Paris, says: ” Without leaving the domain of facts, an d only judging fromwhat we know, we can say that morphology itself justifies the conclusion that one species has never produced another by derivation.”
True science rejects the theory of evolution as being a fraudulent human invention. The Genesis record has stood the test of time and survives all attempts to discredit it. The sole reason for this is because the Bible is Divinely inspired.
“For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.” All things lead back to God and the Bible, so that the mysterious mumbo-jumbo of evolution become as folly and vanity. Wherever we look in the realm of created things there is an order and a perfection that bewilders the limited compass of our minds. The creation in all its magnificence, in all its abounding beauty and variety surely speaks to us of the Infinite Power of the Almighty? “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!”
The words of Isaiah challenge the evolutionists: “Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?”
Evolution and all the other vain philosophies of man are fittingly described by Paul: “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. . . . Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. . . . And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things . . . Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever, Amen.
” We, and the young ones in our midst, would do well to read Paul’s advice to Timothy, and to reflect continually upon it: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called. . . . Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.”
We Spend too Much Time Ridiculing Evolution