Welcome back to Defenders Voice. This is Dr.Paul. Thank you for joining us today. Defenders Voice is about looking at today’s world events from a Christian perspective. If you have any questions, please send me at firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit my website www.doctorpaul.org to subscribe to my podcast.
Today’s question: Scientific American says that denial of evolution is a form of white supremacy. Is it true?
Excellent question. I gave the link below to writer Allison’s article in the magazine Scientific American. She writes,
I want to unmask the lie that evolution denial is about religion and recognize that at its core, it is a form of white supremacy that perpetuates segregation and violence against Black bodies. Evolution denial is not about creation science or religious freedom. At its core it is white supremacy. It is about racism. So, believing in Genesis account of creation makes you a white supremacist.
Then she writes, At the heart of white evangelical creationism is the mythology of an unbroken white lineage that stretches back to a light-skinned Adam and Eve. In literal interpretations of the Christian Bible, white skin was created in God’s image. Dark skin has a different, more problematic origin. As the biblical story goes, the curse or mark of Cain for killing his brother was a darkening of his descendants’ skin. Historically, many congregations in the U.S. pointed to this story of Cain as evidence that Black skin was created as a punishment.
She says that in literal interpretations of the Christian Bible, white skin was created in God’s image. Dark skin is a punishment for Cain’s sin of killing his brother.
Fact of the matter is the Bible never elevates one race above the other. If there is any justification for equality that is in the Bible, and the Bible alone because the Creator of human race gave all of us equal dignity, value and worth. Let us say for a moment, that Darwinian evolution is true. Let us say we are all here by some random mutations. Let us say we are all just animals like any other animals on the face of this planet. In such a world without an absolute moral law giver, there is no justification for human equality. Some animals choose to live like tigers, tearing up other animals to feed themselves. Some animals choose to live like cows just eating grass. Tiger cannot be ‘evil’, cow cannot be ‘good’ because whether you are a tiger or a cow, it is not in your hands. It is nature which made you like that. If you are a White supremacist, nature made you like that. If you are not a White supremacist, nature made you like that. What you become is not in your hands.
I find it amusing when evolutionists talk about moral choices, human dignity and intrinsic human worth. On the one hand, they tell us we are here through random mutations, we act on our instincts, we dance to our DNA, our free will is an illusion, nature determined our behavior. On the other hand, they teach us how racist we are, how we ought to live, what moral choices we should be making. If you are living in a nature red in tooth and claw in which survival of the fittest is the norm, how can you condemn someone for being a White supremacist?
Yes, I agree, even without a Creator God, you can choose to love and respect. You can evolve into a cow. But you cannot enforce ‘cowishness’ on all animals. You cannot go to a tiger and call it ‘evil’. Allison is also making universal claims on morality. That is also contradictory to her worldview. If morality is a human invention, it need not be universally enforced. You cannot say, ‘we invented this morality in America and everyone in the world must follow it’. The Chinese have no obligation to follow the morality invented in America. The Indians have no obligation to follow the morality invented in England. If you invent a hamburger in America, you can say, you like hamburgers, but you should not say, ‘Now, everyone in the world must eat hamburgers’. In the same way, if you had invented human equality, you can say I like ‘human equality’, but you cannot say, ‘the Chinese too must believe in human equality’. In Allison’s view of human morality, there is no place for a priori objective moral laws and a moral law giver, so he has no grounds to condemn white supremacists.
In fact, if you look into history, it was Darwinism which gave justification to racism and white supremacism. Charles Darwin himself wrote in his book Descent of Man,
“The civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races through the world.”
In Darwin’s time, civilized races mean fair skinned people, savage races mean dark skinned people. So, Allison describing Darwin as some sort of Abraham Lincoln is ludicrous. Now, Darwin was a nice English gentleman but he saw the logical consequences of his worldview. As Thomas Malthus suggested, so many animals have been fighting for so limited resources. Only the strongest will survive in this fight. The white
Man will eradicate the dark-skinned people.
Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton coined the term eugenics. Thousands of African Americans, Native Indians, and poor whites were forcefully sterilized in America. Oliver Wendell Holmes notoriously said, three generations of imbeciles are enough and his Supreme Court supported mass sterilization of black people using Darwinism. Only God of the Bible gives human beings equal dignity regardless of their skin color, intellect or financial status.
Herbert Spencer, Darwinism’s strong advocate said, “nothing should come between people and suffering because suffering is the great teacher, and therefore both public and private charity is nothing but the artificial preservation of those least able to take care of themselves.”
Spencer says as we evolve, we should not be charitable towards people who cannot take care of themselves. Through such charity, we artificially preserve unnecessary individuals.
Contrast that to the teachings of Jesus. He said, “truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me”. (Matthew 25:40).
If you show love towards the most undeserved among you, it is like showing love to me. God of the Bible identified himself with the least among us. So, Allison Hooper’s attempt to hang white supremacist label around the neck of the God of the Bible is intellectually dishonest.
Scientific American is neither scientific nor American. It is pseudo-scientific and unAmerican. It became a channel for this untruthful propaganda against creationism which gave the world civil rights movement.