 |
|
“To hell with your theory of evolution Darwin, I
am not related to those idiots!” - King
Kong to Charles Darwin
[PHOTO SOURCE: https://me.me/i/17094252]
[ALBUM SOURCE: https://me.me/t/theory-of-evolution]
|
Why Charles Darwin Rejected the Bible
Charles Darwin, more than any other man, is
responsible for the prevalent view in the Western world that science should be
enthroned above God's Word.
At the Darwin centennial in Chicago in 1959, Sir
Julian Huxley, perhaps the most influential evolutionist of the 20th century,
made the following pronouncement:
“Charles Darwin has rightly been described as the
‘Newton of biology’: he did more than any single individual before or since to
change man’s attitude to the phenomena of life and to provide a coherent
scientific framework of ideas for biology, in place of an approach in large
part compounded of hearsay, myth, and superstition. He rendered evolution inescapable
as a fact, comprehensible as a process, all-embracing as a concept” (Julian
Huxley, Evolution After Darwin, Vol. 1: The Evolution of Life, 1961,
pp. 1-2).
Darwin was not an outright atheist; he referred to
himself as an agnostic. However, he did not always have these views. “Charles
hadn’t always thought about God or religion as a problem. In fact…both Charles
and his father thought he was going to be a country parson” (Deborah Heiligman,
Charles and Emma: The Darwins’ Leap of Faith, 2009, p. 23).
Darwin attended Cambridge University to prepare for
life in the clergy. “While at university, Charles read theology, not just on
assignment but also for pleasure. He especially enjoyed the works of William
Paley. He read Paley’s A View of the Evidences of Christianity …Paley
wrote about natural history, arguing that if you examined specimens carefully,
you could see how beautifully they were created, how perfect they were in
their adaptations.
“This to Paley was evidence of the existence of God
and proof that God was the creator of all species. Charles thought these
arguments were well-written, coherent, and logical. He did not, at that point,
question Paley’s premises about God’s role in creation” (ibid.).
 |
|
I am sorry to have to inform you that I do not
believe in the Bible as a divine revelation, & therefore not in Jesus
Christ as the Son of God. – Charles Darwin
[PHOTO SOURCE: http://www.azquotes.com/quote/684396]
|
Darwin was also an avid student of natural history.
After graduating from Cambridge, he had opportunity to serve as naturalist on
the HMS Beagle —a trip that would last five years, ending in 1836.
“While he traveled…Charles did go to church quite regularly, both to the
services that his captain led and on shore whenever he got the chance. Some of
the crew made fun of him for how religious he seemed…But natural history became
his true passion and now, after the voyage, in 1838, Charles was having serious
doubts about God and Jesus, about the Revelation, about heaven and hell…he had
begun to reject God’s role in creation” (ibid., p. 26).
A number of issues contributed to Darwin’s doubt.
“Many points were being argued about at the time. Three main elements of Holy
Scripture were in question—the Genesis account of the creation of the world and
the Fall of Man, the wrathful character of the God of the Old Testament, and
the New Testament Revelation with Christ’s promise of eternal life…”After
rejecting a literal reading of the Genesis account of the Creation as he learnt
about the vastness of geological time, Charles questioned other historical
parts of the Hebrew Bible, and found that he could not accept the God of the
Old Testament because he was described as a vengeful tyrant” (Randal Keynes, Darwin,
His Daughter and Human Evolution, 2001, pp 47-48).
Darwin’s doubts about religion are understandable
in retrospect, at least for those who understand what the Bible really teaches.
The fact is that some doctrines that caused him to doubt are not in the
Bible. For example, he was particularly troubled about the doctrine of
everlasting torment in hell.
Years later, he would write in his autobiography:
“I can indeed 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”
(quoted by Heiligman, p. 231).
In April 1851, Annie, the beloved daughter of
Charles and Emma, died at 10 years of age after an extended illness. Charles
decided not to attend her funeral because he believed he would gain no comfort
from a Christian service. This event apparently slammed the door on any
remaining faith Charles may have had. “After Annie’s death, Charles set the
Christian faith firmly behind him. He did not attend church services with the
family; he walked with them to the church door but left them to enter on their
own” (Keynes, p. 243).
 |
|
I can indeed 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 of my friends, will be
everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine. - Charles Darwin
|
Had Charles Darwin understood what the Bible states
about heaven, hell, the resurrection of the dead and eternal life, he may well
have never doubted God, Jesus Christ and the Bible in favor of evolution.
Someone else probably would have fashioned the theory
of evolution, as the general idea was floating around in England at that time.
But it might not have originated with Darwin. He admitted his idea was a
theory, and he knew it contained gaps. Still he had faith in his theory that
was greater than the faith necessary for him to believe in the God of the Bible
as he conceived of Him.
In 1881, near the end of his life, he received a
letter from a school teacher that stated, “If we deny the derivation of life
from inorganic matter…the most probable alternative is the idea of an eternal
or ever-living being filling all immensity with his presence, and breathing
into the first animal the breath of life” (quoted by Keynes, pp. 316-317).
 |
|
That there is much suffering in the world no
one disputes. Which is more likely, that pain and evil are the result of an
all-powerful and good God, or the product of uncaring natural forces? The
presence of much suffering agrees well with the view that all organic beings
have been developed through variation and natural selection. - Charles Darwin
[PHOTO SOURCE: http://www.azquotes.com/quote/575122]
|
Darwin wrote back: “I hardly know what to say.
Though no evidence worth anything has as yet, in my opinion, been advanced in
favour of a living being developed from inorganic matter, yet I cannot avoid
believing the possibility of this will be proved some day in accordance with
the law of continuity…Whether the existence of a conscious God can be proved
from the existence of the so-called laws of nature…is a perplexing subject, on
which I have often thought, but cannot see my way clearly” (ibid.).
OTHER
LINKS:
