Apology & Darwin

Apology & Darwin 25 August 2009

Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF DARWINISM ............................................................................................................... 2 DARWIN’S TIMELINE ................................................................................................................................................ 2 DARWIN’S AGENDA ................................................................................................................................................. 2 According to Charles Darwin .......................................................................................................................... 2 According to Thomas Huxley .......................................................................................................................... 3 According to Richard Dawkins ........................................................................................................................ 3 According to Janet Browne ............................................................................................................................. 3 According to other Authorities........................................................................................................................ 3 DARWIN’S IDEA ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 DARWIN’S TOOLBOX ................................................................................................................................................ 4 DARWIN DECONSTRUCTED .............................................................................................................................. 5 THE APPEAL: WHY PEOPLE WOULD ACCEPT DARWIN’S THESIS .......................................................................................... 5 1. Simplicity and Ingenuity .......................................................................................................................... 5 2. Scientific Credibility ................................................................................................................................. 5 3. Lack of Knowledge .................................................................................................................................. 5 4. Ulterior Motives & Pre-commitments to Naturalism .............................................................................. 5 THE PROBLEM: WHY PEOPLE SHOULDN’T ACCEPT DARWIN’S THESIS .................................................................................. 5 The Arguments for Darwinism ........................................................................................................................ 5 The Arguments against Darwinism ................................................................................................................. 6 THE RAMIFICATIONS: THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCEPTED DARWIN’S THESIS ......................................................................... 8 Marxism .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Racism & Apartheid ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Eugenics .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Genocide ......................................................................................................................................................... 9 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................. 10 IS EVOLUTION WORTH FIGHTING OVER? WHAT IS AT STAKE? ......................................................................................... 10 HOW SHOULD CHRISTIANS FIGHT FOR TRUTH?............................................................................................................. 10 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................... 10

PAGE 1

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

INTRODUCTION 2009 in perspective. Comparing Galileo (1609) and Darwin (1859). ―Charles Darwin‘s Origin of Species is surely one of the greatest scientific books ever written.‖ (Browne, 2006:1). ―Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated [by its adherents] as an ideology, a secular religion – a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint... the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it true of evolution still today.‖ (italics mine, Michael Ruse as quoted in (Bergman, 2008:38).

THE DEVELOPMENT OF DARWINISM DARWIN’S TIMELINE Date 1809 1825 1828-1831

1830 1831-1836

1837 1838 1844 1851 1858 1859 1865 1871 1882

Event Charles Darwin is born. Darwin goes to Edinburgh Medical School Studies under Robert Grant (1793-1874) Darwin goes to Cambridge University Studies under John Stevens Henslow (professor of botany) Studies under Adam Sedgwick (professor of geology) Studied William Paley‘s ―Evidences of Christianity‖ ―Principles of Geology‖ is written by Charles Lyell Darwin goes for his 5 year voyage on the HMS Beagle Robert Fitzroy gives Darwin ―Principles of Geology‖ to read Darwin has a significant experience in Tierra de Fuego with the Fuegians Darwin establishes his materialistic/naturalistic agenda Darwin reads Malthus‘s ―An Essay on the Principle of Population‖ Darwin develops his theory of Natural Selection based on the ―survival of the fittest‖ ―Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation‖ is written by Robert Chambers Annie, Darwin‘s second child, dies of fever at only 10 years old Alfred Wallace sends Darwin a letter with the results of his own research ―The Origin of the Species‖ is published ―Experiments on Plant Hybridisation‖ is written by Gregor Mendel ―The Descent of Man‖ is published Darwin dies.

DARWIN’S AGENDA According to Charles Darwin ―But I had gradually come, by this time to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rainbow as a sign, etc., etc., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian... By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported, -- that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become, -- that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us, -- that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events, -- that they differ in many important details, far too important as it seems to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye-witnesses, -- by such reflections as these, which I give not as the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation... I can 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. And this is a damnable doctrine.‖ (Darwin, 1993:71-72)

PAGE 2

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

―I cannot think that the world, as we see it, is the result of chance; and yet I cannot look at each separate thing as the result of design‖ (in a letter to Asa Gray, Browne, 2001:109). ―He who is not content to look, like a savage, at the phenomena of nature as disconnected, cannot any longer believe that man is the work of a separate act of creation.‖ (Darwin, 2004:676). ―For my own part I would as soon be descended from that heroic little monkey... or that old baboon... as from a savage who delights to torture his enemies, offers up bloody sacrifices, practices infanticide without remorse, treats his wives like slaves, knows no decency, and is haunted by the grossest superstitions.‖ (Darwin, 2004:689). ―But I have long regretted that I truckled to public opinion, and used the Pentateuchal term of creation, by which I really meant ―appeared‖ by some wholly unknown process. It is mere rubbish, thinking at present of the origin of life; one might as well think of the origin of matter.‖ (in a letter to Joseph Hooker, 29 March 1863; Darwin, 1887:18)

According to Thomas Huxley ―I am fairly at a loss to comprehend how any one, for a moment, can doubt that Christian theology must stand or fall with the historical trustworthiness of the Jewish Scriptures. The very conception of the Messiah, or Christ, is inextricably interwoven with Jewish history; the identification of Jesus of Nazareth with that Messiah rests upon the interpretation of passages of the Hebrew Scriptures which have no evidential value unless they possess the historical character assigned to them. If the covenant with Abraham was not made; if circumcision and sacrifices were not ordained by Jahveh; if the "ten words" were not written by God's hand on the stone tables; if Abraham is more or less a mythical hero, such as Theseus; the story of the Deluge a fiction; that of the Fall a legend; and that of the creation the dream of a seer; if all these definite and detailed narratives of apparently real events have no more value as history than have the stories of the regal period of Rome–what is to be said about the Messianic doctrine, which is so much less clearly enunciated? And what about the authority of the writers of the books of the New Testament, who, on this theory, have not merely accepted flimsy fictions for solid truths, but have built the very foundations of Christian dogma upon legendary quicksands?‖ (Huxley, 1899:207-208)

According to Richard Dawkins ―even if there were no actual evidence in favour of the Darwinian theory... we should still be justified in preferring it over all rival theories‖ (Dawkins, 1986:287) ―although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist‖ (Dawkins, 1986:6).

According to Janet Browne ―Darwin seemed to be expelling the divine completely from the Western world, calling into doubt everything then believed about the human soul and our sense of morality... Darwin was popularly supposed to have assassinated the idea of God and once, jokingly, labelled himself the ‗devil‘s chaplain‘.‖ (Browne, 2001:2). ―[Darwin] was delighted by the grand theoretical schemes he found in Charles Lyell‘s Principles of Geology and excited by Lyell‘s rejection of biblical authority as a source of geological explanation. The book was commonly regarded as theologically radical...At that time, few geologists believed that the earth had literally been created in six days. They saw the Bible more as a metaphor for the stages that the earth must have undergone from its beginnings to the present day.‖ (Browne, 2001:30-31). ―From the very first, he regarded human beings as members of the animal kingdom and hoped to explain our origins without any reference to God‘s creation‖ (Browne, 2001:42)

According to other Authorities ―The greatest scientific advance of the last 1000 years was providing the evidence to prove that human beings are independent agents whose lives on earth are neither conferred nor controlled by celestial forces…… nothing was more important than providing the means to release men and women

PAGE 3

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

from the hegemony of the supernatural.‖ (Mellman, I. and Warren, G. (2000). The road taken: past and future foundations of membrane traffic. Cell 100, 99–112.) ―First and foremost, The Origin is an exorcism of the doctrine of special creation, and conducted by one of the most skilled exorcists science has ever seen.‖ (Simon Conway Morris)

DARWIN’S IDEA ―The essence of Darwin‘s proposal was that living beings should not be regarded as the carefully constructed creations of a divine authority but as the products of entirely natural processes.‖ (Browne, 2001:84).

CRUX: All species have descended from one or two common progenitors, resulting from modification by the natural selection of many successive slight favourable variations over a vast amount of time and infinite number of generations. Theme/Core of all Darwin‘s work was the concept of variation.

DARWIN’S TOOLBOX Natural Selection, Sexual Selection, Chance, Time, Ignorance, Uniformitarianism & the Fossil Record, Naturalism, Vestigial Organs, ―Poorly designed‖ Features in Nature, Homology, Embryology.

PAGE 4

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

DARWIN DECONSTRUCTED THE APPEAL: WHY PEOPLE WOULD ACCEPT DARWIN’S THESIS 1. Simplicity and Ingenuity The fact that so many people believe in Evolution and haven‘t read the book.

2. Scientific Credibility Darwin‘s thesis has the support of most scientists in all the major universities in the world.

3. Lack of Knowledge 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

People haven‘t read the book critically People have a naive view of ―science‖ People haven‘t been introduced to counter-arguments or problems with the idea People don‘t realise the implications People don‘t know what the Bible teaches on the nature of origins

4. Ulterior Motives & Pre-commitments to Naturalism People don‘t want to believe in the alternative because it makes them accountable to God.

THE PROBLEM: WHY PEOPLE SHOULDN’T ACCEPT DARWIN’S THESIS The Arguments for Darwinism 1. Natural Selection Response: Darwin makes death our deliverer instead of our enemy. Death as a mechanism can only cull, it cannot produce anything new. Natural Selection by itself is not a sufficient agent to explain the concept of progress in evolution. By itself, ―survival of the fittest‖ is only a tautology.

2. Sexual Selection Response: Sexual Selection tries to explain beauty in the world according on entirely mercenary terms, making it merely an adaptation to encourage competition in procreation. Cannot explain the beauty of sunsets, flowers, etc. When it clearly this beauty gives us no survival or procreative advantage – eg. we do not copulate with clouds and rainbows.

3. The Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics Response: This is the fallacy of Use and Disuse causing changes in future generations of organisms, eg. how the giraffe got its long neck, etc.

4. Mutations Response: Mutations are almost always destructive to living organisms (eg. cancer), hindering their survival rather than aiding them. To be called a ―mutant‖ is not a complement. Even the very few examples of constructive mutations do not equate to an increase of genetic information, eg. beetles on a windy island who lose their wings may have a great chance of survival but they have lost the ability to fly. The doubling or copying of DNA does not equate either to an increase in information in the same way that handing an assignment in twice does not equate to twice the marks. There is no example in the literature to date of a single case of new genetic information being produced in existing organisms.

5. Chance Response: A slippery word for equivocation. Chance can be used in two senses – an appeal to probabilities or as a creative agent. The latter sense is basically, according to Sproul, ―an appeal to nothingness‖. Since Darwin uses it in the second sense, we can discount these endeavours as special pleading.

PAGE 5

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

6. Ignorance Response: Appealing to ignorance is not an argument. Darwin admits to be ignorant of the evolution of the eye, the laws of variation, the origin of life and the origin of the mind. To argue that, ―just because we don‘t have any evidence yet doesn‘t mean it didn‘t happen‖ is an argument from wishful thinking, which exposes the irrational commitment to a naturalistic worldview a priori.

7. Time Response: Without vast ages of time, evolution loses all plausibility in the argument from gradualism, which assumes that natural processes are too slow to be observed in the present. Appeal to antiquity not only disregards Biblical chronology and the recorded history of humanity; it also applies the scientific method to an area of investigation entirely outside of its logical jurisdiction. Thus forensic or historical science can never prove the age of the earth.

8. Uniformitarianism Response: this is a philosophical assumption which disbelieves the catastrophes of history which have shaped our earth – specifically and most importantly, the great deluge of Noah.

9. Naturalism Response: this is a philosophical assumption which disbelieves in any supernatural intervention in the world, categorising creation as merely ―nature‖, without any reference to God.

The Arguments against Darwinism Essentially, evolution cannot and does not describe the world we live in. Consider the following:

1. The Fossil Record a. Delicate features preserved – decomposition and decay would destroy such features in days, and in other cases only hours (eg. fossilised dragonfly wings, jellyfish, ferns, butterflies, etc). b. Fossilised creatures in the process of pregnancy or giving birth. c. Polystrate fossils (eg. fossilised trees which traverse multiple layers). d. Fossilised creatures eating & in the process of being eaten by other fossilised creatures. e. Fossil graveyards (grouping adults, infants and multiple creatures which would otherwise congregate separately). f. Fossilised eggs g. Large fossils (eg. whale fossils, titanosaurs (100 tonnes) h. Fossilised footprints i. Fossilised raindrop impressions j. Soft tissue: A. T-Rex bones with red blood cells and visible haemoglobin. B. Hadrosaur (duck billed dinosaur) with proteins: collagen, elastin and laminin. (verified using a mass-spectrometer, scientist: Mary Schweitzer, a palaeontologist at North Carolina State University)

2. Intelligence A. Humans are more Intelligent than Sponges...yet sponges live for more than a 1000 years longer than humans. Compare with the following: Organism Deep sea clam Galapagos land tortoise Giant tortoise Bowhead whale Amazon parrot Bivalve mollusc (eg. clams, oysters, mussels) The Antarctic sponge Great Basin Bristlecone Pine Tree PAGE 6

Longevity (years) 220 193 152 200 104 405 1550 4838

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

B. Humans are more Intelligent than Bacteria...yet the growth of bacteria like E. coli has a doubling time of roughly twenty minutes in comparison to human beings who double, when pressed, over approximately 2 year period. When taken globally, the human population growth rate sits at 1.167% (2009 est) and there are 6,790,062,216 people on our planet (July 30 2009 est.). But there are approximately 5 x 10 prokaryotes on our planet. C. Humans are Intelligent...yet our brains are supposedly the product of random undirected microbiological accidents accumulated by chance over millions of years. ―If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought processes are mere accidents, the accidental byproduct of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the materialists‘ and astronomers‘ as well as for anyone else‘s. But if their thoughts, i.e., of Materialism and Astronomy are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give a correct account of all the other accidents.‖ (C.S. Lewis in God in the Dock) ―Evolution is a good example of that modern intelligence which, if it destroys anything, destroys itself. Evolution is either an innocent scientific description of how certain earthly things came about; or, if it is anything more than this, it is an attack upon thought itself. If evolution destroys anything, it does not destroy religion but rationalism.‖ (G.K. Chesterton in Orthodoxy)

3. The Struggle for Existence ...makes no sense of: a. Heroism b. Altruism c. Martyrdom d. Funerals, and the sanctity of other people‘s lives e. Animal welfare

4. Human Dignity The continuum of varieties and species... a. puts animals on the same level as plants, thereby making no sense of animal welfare programs, human attitudes towards animal cruelty vs. plant cruelty, etc. b. puts humans on the same level as plants and animals, thereby making no sense of or providing a basis for: A. human significance (without special revelation there is no significance) B. human dignity (death, racial discrimination, rape, cannibalism & clothes)

5. Morality In terms of morality, if humans are nothing more than a ―different (and accidental) arrangement of molecules‖, then ―Why should we care at all about the plight of insignificant grown-up germs? What difference does it make if the white germs subjugate the black germs and make them sit at the back of the bus? Who cares if meaningless blobs of protoplasm are exploited in a steel mill or robbed in the halls of justice? Oh, you say, the black germs care and the little blobs of protoplasm cry out. Again I say, ‗So what?‘ A creature with no ultimate value, one who is ultimately insignificant, is not worth any sacrifice. Tell it to the idiot, as he alone can live with empty sound and fury. If man is valueless then we can sleep in tomorrow morning.‖ (J. Blanchard & R.C. Sproul in Does God Believe in Atheists?).

PAGE 7

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

THE RAMIFICATIONS: THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCEPTED DARWIN’S THESIS Richard Sibbes said that, ―Thoughts are the seeds of actions.‖ In a world determined and governed by Darwin‘s theory of ruthless competition and survival, the following “beautiful ramifications” (to quote Charles Darwin) are presented: Marxism, Racism, Rape, Eugenics & Genocide (also Abortion & Euthanasia). These are all consistent with, and support by evolution theory.

Marxism a. Quote from the Communist Manifesto, ―A class of labourers, who live only so long as they find work, and who find work only so long as their labour increase capital. These labourers, who must sell themselves piecemeal, are a comodity, like every other article of commerce, and are consequently exposed to all the vicissitudes of competition, to all the fluctuations of the market.‖ (Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels) b. ―Communism abolishes all religion and all morality‖ (Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels) Influence upon: Mao Zedong (China) (22 000 a month), Joseph Stalin (Russia) – 10 million, Pol Pot (Cambodia) – 1.5 million, [not counting Lenin & Ceauşescu]

Racism & Apartheid a. ―At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes [that is, the ones which allegedly look like people] … will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian [Aboriginal] and the gorilla‖ (Darwin, in The Descent of Man, p.183-184) b. ―No rational man, cognizant of the facts, believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the white man.‘ Huxley described whites as ‗bigger-brained and smaller-jawed.‖ (Thomas Huxley, in Lay Sermons, Addresses and Reviews, p.29) c. ―Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.‖ (Stephen J. Gould in Ontogeny and Phylogeny) d. A pygmy named Ota Benga, born in 1881 in central Africa, was placed in the Bronx Zoo in New York City alongside an orang-utan in order to promote the concept of human evolution. He was only 23 years old, four feet eleven inches tall and weighed a mere 103 pounds. Often referred to as a boy, he was actually a twice-married father — his first wife and two children were murdered by the white colonists, and his second spouse died from a poisonous snake bite. (Phillips Verner Bradford & Harvey Blume, 1992, in Ota Benga: The Pygmy in the Zoo. New York: St. Martins Press) e. General representation of hominids as blacks (eg. Homo floresiensis, 2003, as the ―hobbit‖) f. The theory that man evolved in Africa: reason why Africa is called the cradle of mankind. g. The fact that calling a black person a ―monkey‖ is considered racist but calling a white person a ‗monkey‘ isn‘t. Consider the comment, ―monkeys are black not white‖ – what is implied? Compare with ―Rubber tires are black not white‖. Examples from cricket: i. Ian Botham was referred to as ―pig‖ (not racist) ii. Andrew Symonds referred to as a ―monkey‖ (racist)

Eugenics a. ―With savages, the weak in body and mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute

PAGE 8

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

poor laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of everyone to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands who, from a weak constitution, would formerly have succumbed to smallpox. Thus the weak members of civilised society propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but, excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered in the manner previously indicated more tender and more widely diffused. Nor can we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature … We must, therefore, bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and nd propagating their kind.‖ (Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 2 Ed., pp. 133–134, 1887) b. Francois Galton, cousin of Charles Darwin was the founder of eugenics. c. ―I propose to show in this book that a man's natural abilities are derived by inheritance, under exactly the same limitations as are the form and physical features of the whole organic world. Consequently, as it is easy, notwithstanding those limitations, to obtain by careful selection a permanent breed of dogs or horses gifted with peculiar powers of running, or of doing anything else, so it would be quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations.‖ (Galton, quoted from Hereditary Genius, 1869) d. More than 400,000 people were sterilized against their will, while 70,000 were killed in the Action T4 in Nazi Germany. (Robert N. Proctor, in Racial Hygiene: Medicine under the Nazis, Harvard, p.191, 1988)

Genocide Quotes from Hitler: a. ―I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.‖ b. ―Struggle is the father of all things. It is not by the principles of humanity that man lives or is able to preserve himself above the animal world, but solely by means of the most brutal struggle.‖ c. ―The general evolution of things, even though it took a century of struggle, placed the best in the position that it had merited. And that will always be so. Therefore it is not to be regretted if different men set out to attain the same objective. In this way the strongest and swiftest becomes recognized and turns out to be the victor.‖ (Mein Kampf, Vol II, Ch VIII) NB: ―Mein Kampf‖ literally means ―my struggle‖ d. ―The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all.‖ (Mein Kampf, Vol I, Ch XI, p. 262) e. ―If Nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such a case all her efforts,throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.‖ (Mein Kampf, p. 263) f. ―In the struggle for daily bread all those who are weak and sickly or less determined succumb, while the struggle of the males for the female grants the right or opportunity to propagate only to the healthiest. And struggle is always a means for improving a species' health and power of resistance and, therefore, a cause of its higher development.‖ (Mein Kampf, Vol I, Ch XI)

PAGE 9

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG

CONCLUSION IS EVOLUTION WORTH FIGHTING OVER? WHAT IS AT STAKE? Jesus told us that the greatest commandment is, ―You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself.‖ (Luke 10:27) 1. For the love of our neighbour: a. People are going to Hell b. Unanswered questions 2. For the love of God: a. The authority of the Bible: his word is being contradicted b. The sufficiency of the Bible: his word is being limited c. God is being robbed of his Glory

HOW SHOULD CHRISTIANS FIGHT FOR TRUTH? 1. Wisely: ―There is one whose rash words are like sword thrusts, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.‖ (Proverbs 12:18) a. in proportion to the necessary ramifications b. on a case by case basis 2. Gently: ―And the Lord‘s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.‖ (2 Timothy 2:24-26) 3. Courageously

Isaiah 5:13 “Therefore my people go into exile for lack of knowledge; their honored men go hungry, and their multitude is parched with thirst.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY BERGMAN, J. 2008. Slaughter of the Dissidents: the shocking truth about killing the careers of Darwin Doubters. Southworth, Washington: Leafcutter Press. 448 p. BROWNE, J. 2006. Darwin's Origin of Species. Great Britain: Atlantic Books. 174 p. DARWIN, C. DARWIN, F. ed. 1887. The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin. Vol. III. London: John Murray. 418 p. DARWIN, C. BARLOW, N. ed. 1993. The Autobiography of Charles Darwin. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. 210 p. DARWIN, C. 2004. The Descent of Man. London: Penguin Books. 791 p. DAWKINS, R. 1986. The Blind Watchmaker. England: Longman, Scientific & Technical. 332 p. HUXLEY, T.H. 1899. Science and Hebrew Tradition. New York: D. Appleton and Company. 372 p.

PAGE 10

Prepared by MKM DUBOISEE DE RICQUEBOURG