Things Pure Evolutionists MUST Believe In

tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20159327.post-1137818511903796102006-01-20T21:51:00.000-06:002006-01-20T23:35:49.233-06:00Things Pure Evolutionists MUST Believe InIf you are a pure evolutionist, you have to have a lot of faith. You have to set aside reason and logic and believe that things happen contrary to the natural order of physics and thermodynamics. But I'll save that discussion for another day. This will be a metaphysical discussion rather than a physical one. From Darwins propositions, we will logically show the illogic of his theory. To believe in evolution, one must not merely state one's belief, but one must also demonstrate a willingness and tendency to participate in its processes. Below are the concepts that you must not only accept, but embrace and promote if you claim to be an evolutionist (don't get mad at me for saying these things; I'm not the one promoting evolution): <blockquote> 1.) Exploitation and extermination of lesser species. As the most advanced form of life on the planet, we must not artificially inhibit the evolutionary processes by interfering with nature. When the California Condor or the Giant Panda or the Blue Whale goes extinct, hey, that's just evolution working its magic. Their demise is necessary and proper from an evolutionary standpoint. If mankind interferes with this extinction, he is acting contrary to the evolutionary order of things. Other species are either to be exploited or removed. No tears. Survival of the fittest. If they deserved to live, they would have killed you first. No effort must be made to prevent the extinction of any other living species or potential rivals for resources. Anything you do to prevent or even delay the purging of these genetically weak species is perverting the natural course of evolution. 2.) Anarchy. Law and order are the enemies of Darwinian evolution. Don't believe me? What is the purpose of law? To protect the weak from the strong. This is counterproductive in the Darwinian paradigm, and even harmful. To protect the weak from the strong would ultimately artificially promote the propagation of the genetic material of the weak. In pure evolution, might makes right, and the weak must die out in order to strengthen the race. Murder, stealing, and treachery are not only allowed, but encouraged, as long as the strong can exploit the weak. There are no "victims" allowed in evolution. To be a victim is to be inferior and therefore a detriment to the survival of the species. Evolution demands that you remove your rivals by any means necessary, because survival and propagation is all that matters. 3.) Genocide. Racial purity must be obtained to fulfill the evolutionary progression. Those races which cannot survive do not deserve to survive according to Darwinian philosophy. The most obvious example of this from recent history was of course Adolf Hitler. Hitler was obsessed with evolutionary theory and subsequently the purity of the human race. He intended to promote evolution within the human race by purging humanity of the "weaker" and more "ape-like" races of man. Primitive races of mankind must not be allowed to survive and pollute the genetic well. This behavior is fully consistent with the notion of Darwinian evolution. 4.) Bigamy and rape. The males of the species must mate with as many females as possible, and by force if necessary. This is required to ensure that the genetic material of the strongest specimens is passed on and deseminated as widely as possible. The strongest will be able to force their will upon others and mate with more females than the weaker males, and thus the genetic code of the weak will gradually be phased out of the gene pool over the generations. The purpose of the female is only to bear the children of the strongest males. 5.) Amorality. There can be no mercy, love, respect, or code of moral conduct. These will only serve as a liability to the species by preventing the extermination of the weak. The handicapped must be eliminated. The sick must be destroyed. The rights of the species must take precedence over the rights of the individual. All notions of morality must be squashed, as well as those who promote morality. Morality in any form cannot be tolerated in any form. One must never put the needs of others (mates, children, parents, neighbors, strangers) above their own needs, and must exploit the resources of others at every opportunity. Children of weaker genetic stock must be eliminated before they have the opportunity to reproduce. </blockquote> So how would you like to live in a world like that? I will state it as emphatically as I can: if you believe in evolution, you MUST embrace these concepts. If you find these concepts hard to swallow, then I put it to you that you do not truly embrace the philosophy of evolution. For us to truly follow evolutions teachings, we must debase ourselves to the level of wild animals. The five points above can accurately describe the behavior of wild animals. Does it describe human beings? At times, humanity can certainly take on these traits. But the very fact that humanity is capable of overcoming and defying these traits proves several things. First, we are different from the animals. Humans DO have concepts of morality, law, faithfulness, love, preservation, justice, and fairness. Humans do have the capacity to reach out and provide benefit to the weaker beings around them. Second, and more important, it proves that evolution cannot be true. How could evolution produce in humanity, its highest realization, traits which are contrary to evolution itself? To go counter to the necessary requirements of evolution is to prove that mankind is not the product of evolution. The sense of justice, equality, fairness, morality, law, rights, love, mercy, kindness - these are unique to the human race among the species of the earth. As much as we may anthropomorphize the animal kingdom in literature and imagination, they do not possess these traits. How could mankind have inherited these traits - which are detrimental to the concept of evolution - from evolution itself? This is self-destructive: an oxymoron within a theory which is based on progress through the removal of weakness. I put it to you that the opposite of those five traits - care and protection of lesser species, law and order, racial harmony, familial coherence, and morality - are present and even dominant (albeit in various degrees and manifestations) throughout the human race. I further put it to you that these traits are counter to evolution, and therefore not the product of evolution. Therefore I propose to you that these traits are the result of something else; that mankind is descended not from animals, but from a Higher Power who is the very essense of these traits. This Power embodies consideration for the weak, law and order, union and harmony, the concept of family, and ultimate morality - i.e., the freedom to choose between right and wrong. We are made in His image. The choices we make for right or for wrong determine how much we resemble Him, or how much we resemble the animals. There is enough of His fingerprint on each person to cause us all to desire the good and the right. I do not believe that any person would desire the implications of the five traits of evolution. Those who desire to believe it fail to consider the results of that system if they did not turn out to be the strongest. Evolution paints a bleak picture. It is filled with death and destruction. On the other hand, the notion of a loving God who created us for his purposes gives us hope and meaning. Would you rather live in a world ruled by the mighty, where paranoia and death alienates you from all other creatures, or would you prefer to live in a world where you have meaning and purpose, where you are free and loved? When the early Christian missionaries in Scotland and Ireland were attempting to win the ruthless Vikings to the Christian faith, the results were at first catastrophic. Missionaries were slain by the mighty warlords. Churches and abbeys were plundered and destroyed. It would seem as though evolution were true - the mighty were destroying the weak. But the Vikings eventuall saw in the Christians something of which they had never conceived. These Christians had an indomitable and irrational hope. Death held for them no fear. It is told that at a meeting of a Viking warlord with a Christian missionary, a dove flew into the house by an open window, and then flew out the other side by another window, passing through the room only briefly. The Christian used this as a parable of human life. We enter this world, we fly through it quickly and for a brief time, and exit through the opposite window. The warlord, being very pragmatic, made a profound statement: "If you are wrong, Christian, and this God you live for does not exist, then you and I shall both someday die, and we shall have lost nothing, for dust passes to dust and life has no meaning. But if you are right, and this God does exist, then you and I shall both someday die, and I shall have lost everything." That realization led to his conversion to Christianity. "If you're wrong, nothing matters; but if you're right, nothing else matters." From this man hedging his bets with God, Christianity spread throughout Scandanavia. For him, a life of hope, even if it was false hope, was preferable to a life of hopelessness and dread. That's not quite faith, but it did lead to faith for him and millions of other people. He realized one thing - although he didn't initially know for sure which way was right, he realized that his old beliefs did nothing for him, but that beliefe in Christ provided hope and love. Even if Christianity turned out not to be true, he preferred that life to the alternative. So I put to you - what has evolution done for you lately? If you're right about evolution, and that there is no God, what will you have gained in the end? You and I will each be dead, and you won't even have the chance to say, "I told you so." But if I'm right, and Christianity is true, what will you have lost in the end? Everything. Why would you willing to take that chance? Why would you pass up a life filled with hope in exchange for a life filled with dread of the grave?<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/20159327-113781851190379610?l=beoshingus.blogspot.com'/></div>Beohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07925540975242358243noreply@blogger.com5