Creationist Wisdom #954: Darwinism Is Depravity

Today’s letter-to-the-editor appears in the Rockdale Citizen of Rockdale County, Georgia. It’s titled Objections to Scripture not based in intellect but in immorality, and the newspaper has a comments section.

Unless the letter-writer is a politician, preacher, or other public figure, we won’t embarrass or promote him by using his full name — but today we’ve got a preacher — John Pearrell, pastor of Gateway Community Church in Covington, Georgia. The church’s website says they’re affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention.

If the rev’s name is familiar it’s because he’s been featured in this collection seven times before. The last was #917: Not by Chance, which will get you back to all the others. We’ll give you a few excerpts from his newest letter, enhanced with some bold font for emphasis and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]. Okay, here we go:

In a number of different places, the Apostle Paul makes some comments that are so offensive to modern men. Namely, he states that mankind, apart from God’s Spirit working in them, is incapable of clear thinking. That doesn’t mean that people apart from Christ can’t be smart, but it does mean that people apart from Christ are incapable of seeing certain things clearly.

That may be your problem, dear reader. The rev says:

We could argue this point all day. According to the Apostle Paul the reason for this problem is not intellectual superiority but moral deformity caused by sin. [Egad!] In fact, in one place he says that such people “suppress the truth by their wickedness,” (Romans 1:18, NIV84). That is, their moral depravity leads them to find intellectual arguments against truth claims.

Your moral deformity is probably to blame for your belief in Darwinism. The rev tells us:

I get it that there are those reading this who doubt that anything recorded in the Bible could possibly be true. You think it is ancient ideas written by unenlightened people.

[…]

The Greek Philosopher Plato wrote, “Atheism is a disease of the soul before it becomes an error of understanding.” He is essentially saying the same thing Paul says in Romans 1:18. What often passes today as intellectual acuity is often nothing more than thinly veiled smokescreens for immoral desires.

No doubt about it, dear reader — the rev is talking about the cause of your Darwinism. He continues:

Our objection to Scripture is not intellectual, it is moral: we simply want the freedom to do as we want. We don’t want to be answerable to anyone. The problem is, when we follow this course our ability to think clearly is compromised.

Your depravity and your Darwinism are undoubtedly linked. Let’s read on:

I believe in Creation. [Hooray!] Those who believe in evolution immediately dismiss me as being uneducated. [They’re fools!] In fact, the evolutionary lie is so ingrained in our thinking today that for most anyone who dares challenges it is immediately censored. Teachers on all levels have lost their jobs over it. [Gasp!]

The rev’s final paragraph is one of the best we’ve ever seen:

If I were to suggest that the computer I am writing this article on is a marvelous example of time and chance, you would think I was a few bricks shy of a load. However, when I look at the universe and assume that it is a marvelous example of time and chance, you think me scientifically astute. Why? Because modern man without Christ is incapable of real rational thought.

He’s right! The computer was designed, and so was the universe! Only a morally depraved Darwinist would deny it. Thanks for another great letter, rev!

Copyright © 2019. 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

22 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #954: Darwinism Is Depravity

  1. Michael Fugate

    Some people can be good without gods, others can’t – John considers himself in the latter category. He believes everyone is should be an authoritarian like him; he has no imagination – likely no compassion either – which is why he cites Paul/OT God and not Jesus.

  2. Wikiquote has this information for Plato
    Atheism is a disease of the soul, before it becomes an error of the understanding.
    Actual source: William Fleming, as quoted in Prose Quotations from Socrates to Macaulay by Samuel Austin Allibone, 1816–1889

  3. As Michael Fugate points out, religion and morality have essentially no connection, as anyone who reads the news about many of our leaders would recognize. The reason I ignore religion is that almost everything in the bible (and, I assume, books from other religions) has nothing to do with reality,

  4. Dave Luckett

    The Rev states clearly an idea Paul asserted. The Christian churches have always taught it. But it wasn’t Paul’s idea. It goes back to Jewish sources at least – Psalm 14 and an implication of the Eden story itself. In the Flood story we read it specifically – which means that it probably has pre-Judaic roots, for that story was extant before even henotheism – before Yahweh emerged from the welter of other gods referred to in the first commandment. Even according to Scripture, it existed before the first covenant with Abraham.

    The idea is this: All have sinned and fallen short. There is no good in anyone. Universal depravity is the invariable condition of all human beings. (Christians would add, save one. If Catholic, two.) All human thought is distorted by this wickedness. Thus, there is no trusting any structure built upon human reason. All, all, all is nothing more than a rationalisation of the will to sin.

    The rest follows. All learning, all science, is false knowledge, and vain. The more it is relied on, the more it leads to sin and error. But the Rev would say – he doesn’t actually say this in this letter, but it’s what he thinks – that he can rely on a computer to transmit his Godly message, because he does not rely on human thought to make up the message.

    But the Rev would also deny being merely God’s conduit – well, most likely. See, that would make him a prophet, and he’s probably aware than making such a claim is a no-no. So this is his own thought. It’s human thought. But it isn’t his own thought, because if it were, it would be false. It’s God’s. Only it isn’t.

    Alas, to point out this self-evident contradiction is itself to rely on human logic, human thought. It must be merely another manifestation of that will to sin. Therefore, the Rev can’t think about what he thinks about. He must “be still, and know that I am God.”

    God, the universal solvent. It’s really another iteration of the Ouroboros effect: God can do anything, so anything – even evident contradictions of His own claimed nature or the implications of His acts – is explained by God. Perfect circularity. There’s no way in. That final citadel can’t be breached.

    Only… er… that understanding is yet another product of human reason. Oh dear. It appears to be turtles all the way down, again.

  5. Pastor Johnny makes an astute observation, but forgets a tiny detail: “mankind is incapable of clear thinking”.
    Pastor Johnny is a crystal clear example. So apparently “God’s Spirit is not working in him”.

    “moral deformity caused by sin.”
    Of which Pastor Johnny himself is a grave victim if he takes his own belief system seriously. His

    “moral depravity leads them to find intellectual arguments against truth claims.”
    Pastor Johnny nailed it. Indeed he finds (not so) intellectual arguments (intellectual meaning not grounded in natural reality, but only in human intellect) against the truth claims of evolution theory. For example:

    “Those who believe in evolution immediately dismiss me as being uneducated.”
    Wrong. Unfortunately there are examples of creacrappers who are well educated. The IDiots from Seattle list 1000+ of them.

  6. “Those who believe in evolution immediately dismiss me as being uneducated.”

    While that is true for many creationists, arrogantly and willfully ignorant would be far more accurate for all creationists.*

    *Stupidity is not an optional trait for some creationists.

  7. In the good old days, when people like pastor John got to call the shots, physical deformity or ugliness was sometimes equated with sin. It’s in pretty poor taste to think this way nowadays. Nevertheless, the pastor is not about to let go of such useful emotional tools as “sin”, with which to castigate the unbelievers, and lead the impressionable.

    Moral depravity — anyone who doesn’t subscribe to the pastor’s beliefs. The pastor would like to control my thoughts — he’s an authoritarian, as Michael F points out. Not even I can control my thoughts, sometimes. For instance: I’d like to see the pastor get cancer of the rectum, and die a horrible, slow death (I can’t help it, I tell you! Terrible thoughts just pop into my head like that, totally unbidden! But then, I am morally depraved).

    Never mind. The pastor and all who think like him take comfort in the idea of an eternal damnation for the morally depraved. But as someone much wiser than me once put it: The people who most believe in hell are the ones who most deserve to go there.

  8. Dave Luckett, I don’t know why your comment was delayed.

  9. Of course you do know, dear SC. The god of the creationists, displeased with this blog as always, once again pathetically tried to show off. In vain of course – we have the Great Hand from Above at our side.

  10. If I were to suggest that the computer I am writing this article on is a marvelous example of time and chance, you would think I was a few bricks shy of a load.
    This shows much about creationism.
    First of all, rather than saying that it is incorrect conclusion that the computer was an example of time and chance – why make it a matter of personal fault?
    Why not try to understand what a person is saying, or at least point out how it is mistaken, rather than resorting to an empty insult, “a few bricks shy of a load”? What am I to do, if I pay attention to your advice, and try to add a few more bricks to my load?
    And then, is it any better to say about the computer, where it comes from, why it has particular features, …. to say only, “it was designed”? I don’t understand why my computer does some things, but it doesn’t help me to be told that it was designed. (That is not a bug, it is a feature?) Let alone that it was designed by something from the supernatural! (There is a technical reason why sometimes it is necessary to sacrifice a goat to get the network to work?)

  11. I attempted to post a dissenting view on the paper’s comments section and it was rejected rejected. Interesting.

  12. So a dimwit preacher quotes the words of another dimwit that had some sort of mental episode , falls of his horse, hits his head, see an hallucination of a fairy tale gawd, then starts writing BS. Right!! Definitely a preacher worth listening to.

  13. @L.Long
    No-one thought to ask the horse at Damascus what he made of it all. I bet he made more sense than any of these dimwits put together.

  14. Retired Prof

    ChrisS thinks Paul’s horse probably made more sense of it all than the humans who tried.

    ChrisS is onto something here. Paul’s horse was the only entire horse in the lot of them.

  15. Well, there is Paul’s too-little known epistle to the Equestrians, but most theologians don’t consider it canonical.

  16. Michael Fugate

    Didn’t it begin, “Speaking from the horse’s nether regions, I, Paul….

  17. The rev says “I get it that there are those reading this who doubt that anything recorded in the Bible could possibly be true. You think it is ancient ideas written by unenlightened people.”

    Actually if the pastor preached that there are good and positive lessons that can be gleaned from scripture regarding love, respect for others and forgiveness he might ac tally make a positive note in modern society. Instead he chooses hate and ignorance. Unfortunately, it is people like the good pastor who pervert and preach fundamentalism and hate that decry the messages of peace e and love that do exist in the Bible. (yes they are there beside the genocide and ignorance).

    The pastor’s hatred for science and his ignorance are matched only by his willingness to lead good people to ignorance and willful stupidity. How many children lives have you ruined by teaching them to hate and fear knowledge and science? Answer. A lot. Disgusting letter SC. I wish I could be more positive about this guy.

  18. doubt that anything recorded in the Bible could possibly be true
    Are they many people who think that everything in the Bible is false? There is a city of Jerusalem, there are ruins of a temple, there is a Jordan River, there is a Sea of Galilee, there is a city of Athens, there were Roman emperors, there are several species of animals and plants which are named in the Bible, etc.

  19. @TomS
    Yes, and there was a city of Troy, but that doesn’t make the Iliad necessarily true. Christian apologists often fail to make this distinction between ancient cities and places that existed, and the clearly embroidered legends woven around or attached to them.

    Maybe there was an historical Sodom and Gomorrah — probably located in Syria, or maybe Jordan, according to modern historians — but only a biblical literalist/apologist would think God’s wrath had anything to do with their fabled destruction.

  20. I’ve made the point before and it bears repeating here — why would these preachers blindly trust what they call the word of God (the Bible) which was actually transcribed by the hand of man and thus prone to error, while they reject the direct study of God’s creation? According to their own belief God made the entire creation — not man. So why won’t they trust what they can plainly see with their own eyes and understand by applying their God-given talents of logic and reason?

    Perhaps it’s because many of these Southern Baptist Bible-thumpers are nothing more than modern-day Elmer Gantrys, using their pulpits to enrich themselves at the expense of their poorly-educated flocks.

  21. Steve Gerrard

    “If I were to suggest that the computer I am writing this article on is a marvelous example of time and chance, you would think I was a few bricks shy of a load.”

    Actually no, it is a good example. It took 10 billion years to get the right planet, and 3.5 billion years to get some living cells that could form complex organisms, and 500 million years to get a species that could make things, and thousands of years of fumbling around, but eventually it happened.

  22. @Rsg worries about YHWH’s skills: “why would these preachers blindly trust …..”
    ‘Cuz YHWH guided the hands of those men, duh. Really, I’ve encountered this argument.

    “So why won’t they trust what they …..”
    I guess the answer is something like “Cuz YHWH doesn’t guide the eyes of the faithless”.

    “using their pulpits to enrich themselves”
    That’s their reward for doing YHWH’s work.