Science or ?
Did life come spontaneously
from dead matter?
Are you an apeís cousinís nephew?
Do you have a separable soul?
Is there life after death?
by Louis A. Turk, B.A., M.Div., Ph.D.
The theory of evolution is not science,
as many people have been led to believe, but is the core faith belief held
by the atheistic religion called humanism. All humanist teachings
revolve around and rest upon the evolution worldview.
The significance of evolution is
this: if evolution is true, then the Bible
is not true, and there is no God. And if there is no God, then morality
is relative not absolute, and so "individuals should be allowed to express
their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire" (Humanist
Manifesto II, section 6). It is this freedom from God's morality which
gives humanism its appeal.
"Plato and Aristotle, in general, are the mental gods
of the Humanists."1
Other well known humanists are Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin,
John Dewey (father of so-called "progressive education"), Roger Baldwin
(founder of the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU]), Margaret Sanger
(founder of Planned Parenthood Federation of America), Joseph Fletcher
(author of the book Situation Ethics: the New Morality), Isaac Asimov (writer
and late president of the American Humanist Association), Betty Friedan
(founder of National Organization for Women [N.O.W.]) and Gene Roddenberry
(creator of "Star Trek: The Next Generation").
Sir Julian Huxley, world famous evolutionary biologist,
former head of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization), and a signer of Humanist Manifesto II, clearly stated the
atheistic implication of evolution as follows: Darwinism removed the whole
idea of God as the creator of organisms from the sphere of rational discussion.
Darwin pointed out that no supernatural designer was needed; since natural
selection could account for any known form of life, there was no room for
a supernatural agency in its evolution....I think we can dismiss entirely
all idea of a supernatural overriding mind being responsible for the evolutionary
Since the theory of evolution is being taught daily to our
children in public schools, and since powerful political forces are advocating
humanism as the religion to be espoused by the United Nations, it is very
important that Americans understand more about humanism and its theory
A Deceptive Name For a Deceptive Religion
The name humanism has a nice ring; when people hear it they
tend to think it means humane or cultured. But its name, like all things
about humanism, is deceptive. Since humanists reject belief in God, they
conclude themselves to be the highest life form, and thus assume positions
as gods. The name humanist refers to this self-idolization. Humanism
is the ultimate conceit. Humanist Manifesto II, Section 1,
traditional dogmatic or authoritarian religions that
place revelation, God, ritual, or creed above human needs and experience
do a disservice to the human species. Any account of nature should pass
the tests of scientific evidence; in our judgment, the dogmas and myths
of traditional religions do not do so. Even at this late date in human
history, certain elementary facts based upon the critical use of scientific
reason have to be restated. We find insufficient evidence for belief in
the existence of a supernatural; it is either meaningless or irrelevant
to the question of the survival and fulfillment of the human race. As nontheists,
we begin with humans not God, nature not deity.
Christians agree that any account of
nature "should pass the test of scientific evidence," but point out that
the Bible has never failed this test, while the Humanist theory of evolution
has never passed it, an example of which will be shown below. Meanwhile,
the Bible gives this comment about the Humanist rejection of the Bible,
which is God's supernatural revelation of Himself, and about the Humanist's
rejection of God Himself:
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....changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped
and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.
Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their
women did change the natural use into that which is against nature [became
lesbians]: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which
is unseemly [became homosexuals], and receiving in themselves that recompense
of their error which was meet [disease, AIDS, etc.] And even as they did
not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate
mind (Rom 1.21-28; see also Lev 18.22-30 and Ex 15:26)
As admitted in the preface to Humanist Manifesto I and
II, "Humanism is a philosophical, religious, and moral point of view
as old as human civilization itself." In fact, it originated with Satan
in the Garden of Eden.
Humanism Is Not New
Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the
field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath
God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?....Ye shall not
surely die...your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing
good and evil (Gen 3.1-5).
The myth of evolution also is
not new, beginning even before the temptation of Eve. Only disbelief of
God's Word concerning creation (as given in Gen 1 and 2), could have motivated
Satan to so foolishly try to overthrow God (Rev 12.7-9). No one could possibly
overcome God if God be what He says He is---the omniscient, omnipresent,
omnipotent Creator. But, it is logical to conclude that Satan reasoned
that perhaps God was lying, and that everything---including God---just
evolved from the primeval ooze. And since Satan still is revolting against
God, it is obvious that he is still an avid evolutionist.3
He has swallowed his own lie, and will end up in the eternal Lake of Fire
as a direct result (Rev 20.10).
The Most Ancient Superstition
The History of Evolution
The myth of evolution has an interesting history. The
root idea of evolution is that living beings can come into existence without
parents out of non-living matter. In the past, this presupposition
of evolution was called abiogenesis or spontaneous
generation. Humanists boast that humanism caused the scientific
revolution that brought in all the advancements in medicine in the past
100 years. However, that is not true. In fact, scientists' rejection of
the Bible and belief in the humanist doctrine of evolution kept the medical
world blinded to the true cause of diseases for thousands of years. Unwilling
to accept God's account of creation, and being unable with their naked
eyes to see small creatures reproduce, they reasoned that dead meat just
"spontaneously generated" flies, and that germs had no parents, but evolved
from naturally occurring chemical processes.
The story of the theory of spontaneous generation is
one of the most fantastic in all biology. Thompson says: "If longevity
of a belief were an index to its truth, the theory of spontaneous generation
should rank high among the veracities, for it flourished throughout twenty
centuries and more." We cannot trace the history of the theory in detail,
but the story may be recommended to the psychological historian as a labyrinth
of error, with glimpses of truth at every turn. The belief in spontaneous
generation is recorded in literature back as far as Anaximander (611-547
B.C.). He believed that eels and other aquatic forms are produced directly
from lifeless matter. His pupil Anaximenes (588-524 B.C.) "introduced the
idea of primordial terrestrial slime, a mixture of earth and water, from
which, under the influence of the sun's heat, plants, animals and human
beings are directly produced in the abiogenetic fashion," says Osborn in
"From the Greeks to Darwin." Diogenes and Xenophanes...also believed in
spontaneous generation. Then came the "father of natural history," Aristotle
(384-322 B.C.), who fostered this idea so strongly that it has persisted
for more that twenty centuries.4
Louis Pasteur, the father of modern
medicine, dared to question the evolution dogma. He observed the
opposite of evolution, and suspected that spontaneous generation of living
beings from dead matter was not a reality. Furthermore he believed that
species did not evolve into new species, but rather came from parents of
the same kind as themselves. (This is called biogenesis, and is what the
Bible teaches in Genesis chapter one.) Pasteur realized that if he were
right, different kinds of germs caused different diseases, and by determining
a germ's kind and learning how to kill that kind, the disease it caused
could be cured. Pasteur declared, "It is in the power of man to make parasitic
illnesses disappear from the face of the globe, if the doctrine of spontaneous
generation is wrong, as I am sure it is."5
On April 7, 1864, six years after Charles Darwin
published his Origin of Species, and after Pasteur had endured years of
opposition, ridicule and outright hatred from evolutionary pseudo-scientists,
he lectured in a large lecture room of the Sorbonne concerning his famous
experiments. He began by alluding to the significance of his experiments
to the creation/evolution conflict.
Louis Pasteur Disproved Darwin's Theory
Great problems are now being handled, keeping every thinking
man in suspense; the unity or multiplicity of human races; the creation
of man 1,000 years or 1,000 centuries ago, the fixity of species, or the
slow and progressive transformation of one species into another; the eternity
of matter; the idea of a God unnecessary. Such are some of the questions
that humanity discusses nowadays.
Then he explained his famous experiment, disproving abiogenesis.
He showed two flasks. Both contained portions of the same organic broth.
Both had necks open to the air. Months before, the broth in both had been
sterilized by heat. But the neck of one pointed upward, while the long
neck of the other curved downward, then upward, like a swans neck. "Why
does one decay," he asked, "while the second remains pure?" Then
he answered his question:
The only difference between them is this: in the first
case the dusts suspended in air and their germs can fall into the neck
of the flask and arrive into contact with the liquid, where they find appropriate
food and develop; thence microscopic beings. In the second flask, on the
contrary, it is impossible, or at least extremely difficult...that dusts
suspended in air should enter the vase; they fall on its curved neck....And,
therefore, gentlemen, I could point to that liquid and say to you, I have
taken my drop of water from the immensity of creation, and I have taken
it full of the elements appropriated to the development of inferior beings.
And I wait, I watch, I question it, begging it to recommence for me the
beautiful spectacle of the first creation. But it is dumb, dumb since these
experiments were begun several years ago; it is dumb because I have kept
it from the only thing man cannot produce, from the germs which float in
the air, from Life, for Life is a germ and a germ Life. Never will the
doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow of this
simple experiment....No, there is now no circumstance
known in which it can be affirmed that microscopic beings came into the
world without germs, without parents similar to themselves. Those
who affirm it have been duped by illusions, by ill-conducted experiments,
spoilt by errors that they either did not perceive or did not know how
Evolution Requires Blind Faith
Amazingly, in spite of Pasteur's conclusive evidence against
evolution, atheists still lust to believe any book which explains away
God, no matter how fraudulent. For example, Charles Darwin's Origin
of Species, gave not one proof that has stood the test of time. Yet
it is their bible. If Darwin said it, evolutionists blindly believe it,
and that settles it in their minds.
Charles Darwin is said to have been a shy man, who did
not like public speaking. Thomas A. Huxley, grandfather of Sir Julian Huxley
(previously quoted) was a close friend and public defender of Charles Darwin
and his Origin of Species. So fervently did he promote Darwinian
evolution that he earned the nickname "Darwin's Bulldog." Yet listen to
To say...in the admitted absence
of evidence, that I have any belief as to the mode in which the
existing forms of life have originated, would be using words in a wrong
sense. But expectation is permissible where belief is not; and if it were
given to me to look beyond the abyss of geologically recorded time to the
still more remote period when the earth was passing through physical and
chemical conditions which it can no more see again than man can recall
his infancy, I should expect to be a witness of the evolution of living
substance from non-living matter....This is the expectation to which analogical
reasoning leads me; but I beg you once more to recollect that I
have no right to call my opinion anything but an act of philosophical faith.7
Huxley was one of the rare evolutionists who would admit
that his belief in evolution was "an act of philosophical faith" in a theory
for which there is complete "absence of evidence." Now
we have the truth: evolution is pagan religion,
not science! It really takes faith to believe
in something for which there is not one shred of evidence! To this day,
no one has ever, even once, witnessed non-life give birth to life; if it
ever happened, it would still be happening. Evolution
is a monstrous lie! Think of the millions
of people who died of infectious diseases because of this myth! Think of
the millions now who are rejecting God and dooming themselves to Hell because
of faith in this pagan religious teaching!
Public Schools Are Humanist Churches
The First Ammendment to the Constitution forbids teaching
religion in pubic schools, yet the biology book used in the Oklahoma City
Public School District teaches the unscientific, occult, humanist religious
doctrine of evolution, saying,
Today, however, the principle of biogenesis may have
to be modified. When considering the origin of life on Earth, some scientists
have hypothesized that the first cells arose from non-living materials."8
This is indeed an unbelievable giant-step
back to the Dark Ages for science-and for our children! Such
is the dubious science of wizards and soothsayers. No wonder the
Bible warns us to avoid
profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science
falsely so called: which some professing have erred concerning the faith
(I Tim 6.20-21).
Evolution exposed to be a myth, we
come unavoidably to the only alternative origin of life: special creation
by the true and living God. And we begin to
understand why "The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge" (Prov
1.7), and why no educational system that rejects God can succeed.
As Jesus put it, the word of God "is truth" (John
17.17); scholars who reject it doom themselves to be "ever learning, and
never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim 3.7). And
since the Bible is truth, every doctrine in it is true: doctrines such
as the absoluteness of truth and morals, the fall of man, the global flood
in the days of Noah, a literal Heaven and a literal burning Hell, the virgin
birth of Christ thereby providing a sinless Savior, Christ's substitutionary
death on the cross to redeem us from our sins, His burial and bodily resurrection,
salvation not of works but by grace through faith in Christ, the absolute
necessity of repentance and the new birth, and the fact that Christ will
return to judge those who reject Him---everything the Bible teaches is
inerrantly true, and if we ignore it we do so at great peril. "The fool
hath said in his heart, There is no God" (Ps 14.1).
The Unavoidable Conclusion
To learn more about how to know God, read "Ye Must
Be Born Again."
1"Scholastic, Humanist and Scientific Thought
and Theory" in The Outline of Knowledge, James A. Richard, ed. (New
York: J.A. Richards, Inc., 1924), vol. 2, The Story of Religion and Philosophic
Thought, by Frederick H. Martens, 282.
2Sir Julian Huxley in "At Random: A Television
Preview," in Evolution After Darwin, Sol Tax, Ed., (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1960), vol. 3, Issues In Evolution, 45.
3For a detailed discussion of Satan as the
first evolutionist see Henry M. Morris, The Long War Against God: the
History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Book House, 1989), 255-327.
4"The Origin of Life" in The Outline of
Knowledge, James A. Richard, ed., (New York: J.A. Richards, Inc., 1924),
vol. 6, Biology, by Carolina E. Stackpole, 227-8.
5Louis Pasteur as quoted in Beverley Birch,
Louis Pasteur: the Scientist Who Found the Cause of Infectious Disease
and Invented Pasteurization (Milwaukee: Gareth Stevens Children's Books,
6Louis Pasteur as quoted in Vallery-Radot,
The Life of Pasteur, translated by R.L. Devonshire (Garden City,
New York: Doubleday, Page & Company, 1923), 107-9.
8Harvey D. Goodman et al., Biology (Orlando:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1989), 32 and 228-230.
(C) Copyright 1994 by Louis A. Turk. All rights reserved. You may
reprint this article, provided you do not edit it in any way without the
author's consent, and provided this paragraph is printed at the end of
the article. Other publication requires advance permission of the
Louis A. Turk, B.A., M.Div., Ph.D.
The website dedicated to the study of eternal life.
ETERNAL LIFE IS NOT TEMPORARY LIFE!