The Ethical Atheistic Evolutionist
If you truly believe in evolution, and you are an atheist, then you are probably not being true to your core worldview. I could be wrong, but I'm not, as the song goes. Why do I say this? Because most people with such a worldview mix large helpings of Christian mores and morals into their lifestyles. Let me explain, but first allow me to help myself to an acronym, EAE, to save my fingers from additional work going forward.
The average EAE, as an atheist, doesn't believe in God and therefore doesn't accept rules laid down by God in the Bible. This is a conundrum for him, since society in general is based on quite a few of the Biblical injunctives and so if he is to remain free in society (not being jailed) then such laws must be obeyed. However, as a believer in evolution, survival of the fittest and all that, he sees life as an accident with no intrinsic meaning or value other than to simply please oneself. Other people are meaningless to him except as they please him somehow. Laws of the land are a nuisance, but he will either obey them to remain free or cleverly get around them as he is able. In short, the EAE finds himself adhering to many Biblical laws in order to maintain his freedom, while seeing no value in those laws otherwise.
Some EAE simply try to believe, and convince others, that Biblical morality was actually thought up by men and have nothing to do with a God. There are those who devote a great deal of time to promotion of evolution and humanism and atheism at the expense of belief in God, like Richard Dawkins (who recently published The God Delusion). Hank Hanegraaf of Christian Research Institute recently cited a few current EAE who are actively seeking to eliminate Christianity:
1) Sam Harris, a devoted atheist, wrote that "Science must destroy Christianity."
2) Bill Maher, liberal talkshow host, said that Christians have a "neurological disorder."
3) Comedians Penn and Teller ridicule the Bible as "expletive deleted."
So, some EAE preach against Christianity and some want their name to live on after themselves. This is something that pleases them. It therefore fits into their worldview to an extent. But people who are not actively promoting or living the EAE philosophy, like Maher and Harris and Dawkins, are pikers! They talk the talk, but do they walk the walk, really?
Look at me, a Christian! I give both time and money to the cause of Christ, serving in the local church, supporting missions, posting blogs and having conversations with others concerning both my faith and my worldview. Unlike Christ Himself, I don't do these things perfectly but they are thematic to my life. I am living in accordance with my worldview.
Some of the most famous preachers against God are more talk than action. They believe things written by Karl Marx and Charles Darwin but don't carry the thoughts out very far. But there are those who have...
Adolf Hitler is a great example of an EAE who dared to live his beliefs. He considered evolution to be true and wanted "his" race to be the winner, in fact, was quite sure that the Aryans would eventually dominate humanity. His goal was to hasten the process and see his name go down in history as the great Fuhrer and Leader who led the Aryans to the pinnacle. Naturally, inferiors such as the Jews had to be eliminated or enslaved. Actual Christians had to be eliminated or enslaved. Hitler's only religion was humanism and his only god was himself. He dared to live out his beliefs.
Jeffery Dahmer is another EAE Hall-of-Famer.
Dahmer, the serial killer/cannibal, was living out his worldly philosophy. He didn't care about rules or regulations and gave no consideration to God or morality, he simply decided to do what he wanted to do and believed himself capable of getting away with it. He would later say, in retrospect:
"If I'd been thinking rationally I would have stopped. I wasn't thinking rationally because it just increased and increased. It was almost like I wanted to get to a point where it was out of my control and there was no return. I mean, I was very careful for years and years, you know. Very careful, very careful about making sure that nothing incriminating remained, but these last few months, they just went nuts… It just seemed like it went into a frenzy this last month. Everything really came crashing down. The whole thing started falling down around my head… That was the last week I was going to be in that apartment building. I was going to have to move out and find somewhere to put all my possessions. Should I get a chest and put what I wanted to keep in that, and get rid of the rest? Or should I put an end to this, try to stop this and find a better direction for my life? That's what was going through my mind that last week."
Dahmer became miserable upon being caught. He lamented his fate and spoke freely of the things he'd done, almost as if he'd been an observer rather than the active participant.
"Yes, I do have remorse, but I'm not even sure myself whether it is as profound as it should be. I've always wondered myself why I don't feel more remorse."
But of course, his remorse is centered upon one thing, being captured and facing consequences. Dahmer's remorse, such as it was, centered upon himself and not on those he had killed and tortured and desecrated. Thus, he remained true to his belief system even after capture.
We see the result of the selfish heart illustrated in the book, Lord of the Flies. Away from the influences of society and Godly instruction, the natural man (or boys, in this case) allow their own desires to run roughshod over others to the point of murder.
But the most dedicated and pure of EAE don't simply allow themselves to be ruled by their beliefs and emotions, but are proactive in living them out. I give you Leopold and Loeb, who decided to kill young Bobby Franks simply because they could, because they believed themselves to be superior beings and they believed that they would get away with it. Clarence Darrow, their attorney, had them plead guilty to the crime once caught, but pleaded with the judge to spare them with the following words:
"I say to you seriously that the parents of Dicky Loeb are more responsible than he, and yet few boys had better parents." and, "I know that one of two things happened to this boy; that this terrible crime was inherent in his organism and came from some ancestor, or that it came through his education and his training after he was born."and also, "I do not know what remote ancestor may have sent down the seed that corrupted him, and I do not know through how many ancestors it may have passed until it reached Dicky Loeb. All I know is, it is true, and there is not a biologist in the world who will not say I am right."
Both Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were followers of the Nietszche school of thought and considered themselves to be "supermen" not answerable to society at large. Nietzsche (known as "the child of Darwin") preached that evolution would inevitably lead to the development of the "superman" who would be above all laws, a law unto himself. Thus, like Hitler, they lived out their beliefs...and, like Hitler, would discover that consequences would come to them despite their personal philosophy.
~
I would argue that the majority of EAE adherents are living out a lie. They don't truly act upon their beliefs, instead living half-in and half-out of a lifestyle that has its roots in Biblical morality. They do so to get along, to avoid making waves, etc, etc. They obey the laws of the land, may well be generally kind to others (in order to receive the praise/admiration/acceptance of their peers) and may well participate in Godly traditions such as marriage and parenthood. I am glad that they do so! We don't need any more Hitlers or Dahmers. But I will also say that the average EAE hasn't truly considered the belief system they claim as their own. For in the purest form, the EAE is amoral, anarchistic and destructive. Hitler was a great EAE.
But how can I say someone like Dahmer is ethical??? Wikipedia:
If you disagree with my thoughts, I want to ask you a question, two, in fact: "Is there such a thing as right and wrong? If so, by what authority have they been proclaimed?"
~
I am curious to see what the responses may be. Myself, I certainly believe what is written in the Bible, specifically, Galatians 6:7&8:
"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life."
There is a higher authority, there are absolutes, there is a reason for living and a Creator who created with purpose and plan. Those who understand this and live accordingly tend to support a better world now even as they work to attain another world beyond this plane of existence. Those who do not often are a detriment to society and to themselves. That's my story...rebuttal, anyone?
The average EAE, as an atheist, doesn't believe in God and therefore doesn't accept rules laid down by God in the Bible. This is a conundrum for him, since society in general is based on quite a few of the Biblical injunctives and so if he is to remain free in society (not being jailed) then such laws must be obeyed. However, as a believer in evolution, survival of the fittest and all that, he sees life as an accident with no intrinsic meaning or value other than to simply please oneself. Other people are meaningless to him except as they please him somehow. Laws of the land are a nuisance, but he will either obey them to remain free or cleverly get around them as he is able. In short, the EAE finds himself adhering to many Biblical laws in order to maintain his freedom, while seeing no value in those laws otherwise.
Some EAE simply try to believe, and convince others, that Biblical morality was actually thought up by men and have nothing to do with a God. There are those who devote a great deal of time to promotion of evolution and humanism and atheism at the expense of belief in God, like Richard Dawkins (who recently published The God Delusion). Hank Hanegraaf of Christian Research Institute recently cited a few current EAE who are actively seeking to eliminate Christianity:
1) Sam Harris, a devoted atheist, wrote that "Science must destroy Christianity."
2) Bill Maher, liberal talkshow host, said that Christians have a "neurological disorder."
3) Comedians Penn and Teller ridicule the Bible as "expletive deleted."
So, some EAE preach against Christianity and some want their name to live on after themselves. This is something that pleases them. It therefore fits into their worldview to an extent. But people who are not actively promoting or living the EAE philosophy, like Maher and Harris and Dawkins, are pikers! They talk the talk, but do they walk the walk, really?
Look at me, a Christian! I give both time and money to the cause of Christ, serving in the local church, supporting missions, posting blogs and having conversations with others concerning both my faith and my worldview. Unlike Christ Himself, I don't do these things perfectly but they are thematic to my life. I am living in accordance with my worldview.
Some of the most famous preachers against God are more talk than action. They believe things written by Karl Marx and Charles Darwin but don't carry the thoughts out very far. But there are those who have...
Adolf Hitler is a great example of an EAE who dared to live his beliefs. He considered evolution to be true and wanted "his" race to be the winner, in fact, was quite sure that the Aryans would eventually dominate humanity. His goal was to hasten the process and see his name go down in history as the great Fuhrer and Leader who led the Aryans to the pinnacle. Naturally, inferiors such as the Jews had to be eliminated or enslaved. Actual Christians had to be eliminated or enslaved. Hitler's only religion was humanism and his only god was himself. He dared to live out his beliefs.
Jeffery Dahmer is another EAE Hall-of-Famer.
‘If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then—then what’s the point of trying to modify your behaviour to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway. I always believed the theory of evolution as truth, that we all just came from the slime. When we, when we died, you know, that was it, there is nothing…’
Jeffrey Dahmer, in an interview with Stone Phillips, Dateline NBC, Nov. 29, 1994. Believing as he did, he didn't try to keep his impulses in check...
"I was completely swept along with my own compulsion. I don't know how else to put it. It didn't satisfy me completely so maybe I was thinking another one will. Maybe this one will, and the numbers started growing and growing and just got out of control, as you can see. "Dahmer, the serial killer/cannibal, was living out his worldly philosophy. He didn't care about rules or regulations and gave no consideration to God or morality, he simply decided to do what he wanted to do and believed himself capable of getting away with it. He would later say, in retrospect:
"If I'd been thinking rationally I would have stopped. I wasn't thinking rationally because it just increased and increased. It was almost like I wanted to get to a point where it was out of my control and there was no return. I mean, I was very careful for years and years, you know. Very careful, very careful about making sure that nothing incriminating remained, but these last few months, they just went nuts… It just seemed like it went into a frenzy this last month. Everything really came crashing down. The whole thing started falling down around my head… That was the last week I was going to be in that apartment building. I was going to have to move out and find somewhere to put all my possessions. Should I get a chest and put what I wanted to keep in that, and get rid of the rest? Or should I put an end to this, try to stop this and find a better direction for my life? That's what was going through my mind that last week."
Dahmer became miserable upon being caught. He lamented his fate and spoke freely of the things he'd done, almost as if he'd been an observer rather than the active participant.
"Yes, I do have remorse, but I'm not even sure myself whether it is as profound as it should be. I've always wondered myself why I don't feel more remorse."
But of course, his remorse is centered upon one thing, being captured and facing consequences. Dahmer's remorse, such as it was, centered upon himself and not on those he had killed and tortured and desecrated. Thus, he remained true to his belief system even after capture.
We see the result of the selfish heart illustrated in the book, Lord of the Flies. Away from the influences of society and Godly instruction, the natural man (or boys, in this case) allow their own desires to run roughshod over others to the point of murder.
But the most dedicated and pure of EAE don't simply allow themselves to be ruled by their beliefs and emotions, but are proactive in living them out. I give you Leopold and Loeb, who decided to kill young Bobby Franks simply because they could, because they believed themselves to be superior beings and they believed that they would get away with it. Clarence Darrow, their attorney, had them plead guilty to the crime once caught, but pleaded with the judge to spare them with the following words:
"I say to you seriously that the parents of Dicky Loeb are more responsible than he, and yet few boys had better parents." and, "I know that one of two things happened to this boy; that this terrible crime was inherent in his organism and came from some ancestor, or that it came through his education and his training after he was born."and also, "I do not know what remote ancestor may have sent down the seed that corrupted him, and I do not know through how many ancestors it may have passed until it reached Dicky Loeb. All I know is, it is true, and there is not a biologist in the world who will not say I am right."
Both Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb were followers of the Nietszche school of thought and considered themselves to be "supermen" not answerable to society at large. Nietzsche (known as "the child of Darwin") preached that evolution would inevitably lead to the development of the "superman" who would be above all laws, a law unto himself. Thus, like Hitler, they lived out their beliefs...and, like Hitler, would discover that consequences would come to them despite their personal philosophy.
~
I would argue that the majority of EAE adherents are living out a lie. They don't truly act upon their beliefs, instead living half-in and half-out of a lifestyle that has its roots in Biblical morality. They do so to get along, to avoid making waves, etc, etc. They obey the laws of the land, may well be generally kind to others (in order to receive the praise/admiration/acceptance of their peers) and may well participate in Godly traditions such as marriage and parenthood. I am glad that they do so! We don't need any more Hitlers or Dahmers. But I will also say that the average EAE hasn't truly considered the belief system they claim as their own. For in the purest form, the EAE is amoral, anarchistic and destructive. Hitler was a great EAE.
But how can I say someone like Dahmer is ethical??? Wikipedia:
Ethics (via Latin ethica from the Ancient Greek ἠθική [φιλοσοφία] "moral philosophy", from the adjective of ἤθος ēthos "custom, habit"), a major branch of philosophy, is the study of values and customs of a person or group. It covers the analysis and employment of concepts such as right and wrong, good and evil, and responsibility. It is divided into three primary areas: meta-ethics (the study of the concept of ethics), normative ethics (the study of how to determine ethical values), and applied ethics (the study of the use of ethical values).
Because "ethics" to an atheistic evolutionist, a humanist, are quite different from the ethics of the traditionalist. The EAE doesn't recognize any authority behind the concepts of "right and wrong" and may even deny that "right and wrong" even exist. Perhaps I would be better served using the term, "Integrity" instead. Hitler had integrity of belief and actions, he was what he was and he did as he believed. He practiced what he preached.If you disagree with my thoughts, I want to ask you a question, two, in fact: "Is there such a thing as right and wrong? If so, by what authority have they been proclaimed?"
~
I am curious to see what the responses may be. Myself, I certainly believe what is written in the Bible, specifically, Galatians 6:7&8:
"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life."
There is a higher authority, there are absolutes, there is a reason for living and a Creator who created with purpose and plan. Those who understand this and live accordingly tend to support a better world now even as they work to attain another world beyond this plane of existence. Those who do not often are a detriment to society and to themselves. That's my story...rebuttal, anyone?