Creationist Wisdom #810: Evolution Is Immoral

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Herald Journal of Logan, Utah. It’s titled On the subject of God and morality, and they have a comments feature.

Because the writer isn’t a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name. His first name is Robert. Excerpts from his letter will be enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary and some bold font for emphasis. Here we go!

He begins with a bible quote:

The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”

That sets the tone. Then he says:

In her letter to the editor of Nov. 4, 2017, Ms. Cathy Mason makes a number of comments respecting a range of subjects including the question of the existence of God, or the lack thereof, the nature of good and the question of “ancient books,” the Book of Mormon being one.

This is probably the letter he’s talking about: No god is needed for good behavior. But if you already clicked over to Robert’s letter, the newspaper won’t let you read anything else without signing in. Anyway, Robert disagrees with Cathy Mason. He tells us:

Regarding the existence of God and the question of the origin of the universe, we are left with two distinct possibilities: Either a supreme being, God, was the author of the universe, or so called “natural selection,” mother nature, was the progenitor of the creative process. In other words, the creation is a massive series of cosmic accidents resulting in the world we know today with all its extraordinary complexity and design.

Yes, those are the two possibilities. Robert has a good grip on the situation. He continues:

If we accept Ms. Mason’s position that God does not exist, and that “Evolution has been proven repeatedly…”, then we are left with naturalism – evolution.

Gasp! That is totally unacceptable! Let’s read on:

In his book “The Battle for The Beginning,” Dr. John MacArthur quotes Harvard professor and Nobel laureate George Wald:

Whoa — hold on a minute. Wikipedia has a write-up on John F. MacArthur. About that book, Wikipedia says:

MacArthur advocates young-earth creationism in his book, The Battle For the Beginning (2001), and in his sermons. Speaking about evolutionary theory, he writes that Christians “ought to expose such lies for what they are and oppose them vigorously.” He argues that “the battle for the beginning is ultimately a battle between two mutually exclusive faiths – faith in Scripture versus faith in anti-theistic hypotheses. It is not really a battle between science and the Bible.”

Are we supposed to rely on Robert’s account of MacArthur’s description of what Wald said? No, we won’t rely on it, but here’s a bit of what Robert says. He’s sloppy with his quote marks, and it’s difficult to know if he’s quoting MacArthur the creationist or Wald the Nobel laureate. Anyway, he tells us:

“One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible.” Then he added, “Yet here we are – as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation.” How did Wald believe this impossibility came about? He answered: “Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain.

In the same paragraph, Robert (or maybe MacArthur the creationist) says:

That is sheer double-talk. And it perfectly illustrates the blind faith underlies naturalistic religion.

The next paragraph is the last in the letter, and it’s presumably from Robert. He says:

In the end apart from God, all standards of morality depend on moral relativism, or subjectivism, regardless of the rationalizations that may be put forward in an attempt to impose, and justify, secularist values on others.

So, dear reader, what did we learn from this? We can’t figure it out. Perhaps you can.

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

6 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #810: Evolution Is Immoral

  1. Ross Cameron

    ‘And it perfectly illustrates the blind faith underlies (naturalistic remove) religion.’ Fixed it. This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

  2. I heard several lectures by George Wald at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, MA. While I could not quote him correctly, the role of time in evolution was something he did discuss in some of his talks. Of course John MacArthur and letter writer Robert clearly wouldn’t understand what Wald was talking about, poor things.

  3. John MacArthur is very clued up on science. His six-part series “Science and the Bible” is a good summary:
    Depending on your current mood you will find it either infuriating or hilarious.

  4. The Quote Mine Project of, part 2 #4.19 treats the quote from George Wald

  5. Michael Fugate

    In the end apart from God, all standards of morality depend on moral relativism, or subjectivism, regardless of the rationalizations that may be put forward in an attempt to impose, and justify, secularist values on others.

    Notice how there is no attempt to tell us what those “objective” standards are.

    [Paul] Ryan and other politicians have been criticized for offering thoughts and prayers instead of legislative action to reduce gun violence. But on Monday night, Ryan told Fox News host Laura Ingraham:

    “It’s disappointing, it’s sad, and this is what you’ll get from the far secular left. People who do not have faith don’t understand faith, I guess I’d have to say. And it is the right thing to do is to pray in moments like this, because you know what? Prayer works. And I know you believe that, and I believe that and when you hear the secular left doing this thing, it’s no wonder you have so much polarization and disunity in this country when people think like that.”

    Prayer works? Works to do what? How? When? Where?
    What about the secular right, middle or even the not so far left? Do they believe prayer does anything? How about love-ins? Do they work?

  6. Hey Paul Ryan, suck on this!:
    “What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”

    From James 2.