Do All Scientists and Surgeons Believe in Evolution?

by Joshua Gurtler

It has been suggested that all credible scientists believe in evolution. Another way this is phrased is, “The scientific establishment is unified regarding the teaching of evolution.” If by evolution one means a change in gene frequency within a given animal kind over time, then, yes – all scientists agree on this fact. A very different belief is what is known as the general theory of evolution, or neo-Darwinism (ND). This is the idea that all living creatures on earth, from the 1 micrometer Rickettsia bacterium, to the world record 10,000 pound White Rhinoceros, to the 380 feet tall Sequoia sempervirens all originated from one single-celled organism 3.6 billion years ago (plus or minus 1%, of course). Another common belief is the idea that medical students are unable to acquire a comprehensive understanding of human anatomy, physiology and biochemistry unless they believe in ND.

Daring Darwinian Dissenters. The truth is that many humanists, atheists and other misguided individuals don’t want you to know a startling fact – there exists an uninterrupted lineage of accredited scientists and surgeons stemming all the way back to Charles Darwin’s day (ca. 1859) who have stood in vociferous opposition to Dawin’s evolutionary hypothesis. These historical creationists and their stories are conspicuously overlooked, while ND is upheld as impregnable in publicly-funded classrooms. Have you ever heard the names Louis Pasteur, James Joule, Joseph Lister, George Washington Carver, Gregor Mendel, or Warner von Braun? Probably so. Were you ever taught that the “fathers” of pasteurization, thermodynamics, antiseptic surgery, African-American scientists, genetics, and modern rocketry were all opposed to Darwin’s ideas? Probably not. It has been said that those who win the wars write the history. Unfortunately, control of public education in this country, and in most institutions of higher learning, has been won by Darwinian supporters; thus, the true history of opposition to Darwinism has been all but wiped from the pages of public text books. The inevitable consequence is that student’s are left with the impression that ND has no serious scientific objectors. Nevertheless, the majority of public high school science teachers in this country do not believe in abiogenesis (the origin of life from non-life) and ND. In fact, a 2008 Gallup poll revealed that only 14% of Americans oppose creationism and intelligent design in favor of ND.

Push Me – Pull You Petitions. It is generally recognized that you can only push a group of people so hard for so long until they begin pushing back. This occurred in 2001 and 2004, respectively, by the signing of two petitions. The first was “A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism,” with 820 current signers holding doctoral degrees from accredited universities, or either individuals with medical doctoral degrees who also hold faculty positions. Their statement reads, “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.” The list is not composed of only “right-wing Christian conservatives” as some might think, but is even made up of many religious Jews, agnostics and Muslims. Other signers include academics from all eight Ivy League schools, as well as from Stanford, Duke, Rice, Emory, Carnegie Mellon, Cal. Tech., Johns Hopkins, Vanderbilt, U.C. Berkley, McGill, Oxford, Cambridge, Manchester, Bristol, University of Nottingham, Imperial of London, Heidelberg University, Moscow State University, Seoul National University, and the University of Tokyo. Not to be overlooked, the second petition, “Physicans and Surgeons Who Dissent from Darwinism” was created in 2004 and currently has 868 signers from 17 countries. The list boasts some of the top international surgeons in cardiology, neurology and pediatric neurology, orthopediology, and plastic surgery, just to name a few.

These documents, however, are latecomers. The push actually began only five years after Darwin’s writings were published in 1859 when 717 scientists, including 86 Fellows of the Royal Society in London, signed “The Declaration of Students of the Natural and Physical Sciences” in direct response to Darwinism and affirming a divine designer. Someone might respond, “lining up scientists on your side doesn’t prove neo-Darwinism is wrong.” My response would be, “Lining up scientists on your side doesn’t prove Darwin was right.” In fact, this last affirmation is what reputable scientists and surgeons who oppose ND have been saying for the past 160 years.

Most creationists have heard and/or studied the tenants of evolution from their youth, while many evolutionists have never considered the weight of evidence against ND and in favor of intelligent design. The facts we have just considered might be a useful tool in opening the minds of your friends to a deeper study of origins, intelligent design, or the words of Jesus. “How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14, NASB)

The Bible Story in 90 Minutes!

Would you like to have an understanding of the Bible as a whole? Maybe you aren't certain in your own mind as to the origin of the Bible. Maybe you are open to the idea that it's from God, but aren't really sure how much of it is from God. Maybe you aren't ready to become part of a church, but you would like to know a little more than you do about the Bible itself.

If you are such a person, and if you live in or near Chester County, PA, I'd like to talk with you. In one 90 minute one-on-one session, I can give you the big picture, showing you how what you already know fits into the overall story of the Bible. After that, if you aren't interested in any further study, you have no obligation to me.On the other hand, if you'd like to go a bit further and understand a bit more, we can meet a 2nd time, a 3rd, or more. It's up to you. Interested?

Please enter your contact information below, or call me, Jeff Smelser, at (571) 214-9328

GOD'S LIGHT IN THIS WORLD

11/05/2008

WCOJ, one-time home of my favorite local radio broadcast, Ron O'Neil's "Swap Shop," has been sold and now features all Catholic programming all the time. Last week or so, I heard someone on one of its programs, perhaps a nationally syndicated program, explaining the Catholic doctrine that says one must accede to the Roman Church's interpretation of scripture.

The Catholic speaker (I don't recall his name or title) had a little sentence which he used to make his point. It was, "I never said you stole money." A quick Google search yields a Catholic web site that makes exactly the same argument, using exactly the same sentence. It goes like this:

The writer of that sentence might have meant,

"I never said you stole money", implying someone else said it.

Or perhaps he meant "I never said you stole money." He thought it, he suspected it, but he never said it.

Or maybe "I never said you stole money." He said your neighbor stole it.

Or, "I never said you stole money." He means that you lost it, or squandered it, or did something else with it that he didn't approve of, but you didn't steal it.

Or, "I never said you stole money." Maybe you stole his horse, or shoes, not his money.

This shows how easy it is to derive several legitimate but very different meanings from this short, six word sentence. Think how easily the Bible can be misinterpreted. We can't just assume we have the correct understanding of Scripture. We need an authority to guide us, and the only true authority on the Bible is the Catholic Church.

Well, of course all of those meanings are possible. But you know, in real life, when someone says, "I never said you stole money," there's a context that helps me understand what he means. What he says is part of a larger conversation, and within the context of that conversation, I can discern his meaning. I certainly don't go looking for some institution headquartered in Rome to tell me what that someone meant.

So it is with the Bible. Yes there are phrases, sentences, even paragraphs that could be understood in different ways without sufficient knowledge of the context. But the solution is not to have some organization, whether it be a church or anything else, tell you what is meant. The solution is to become sufficiently familiar with the Bible yourself that you understand the context of the particular passage, and then you can understand its meaning.

We don't "need an authority to guide us." The scriptures themselves are the authority. They are the word of God. We just need to know them.

It takes effort. It takes time. But if your employer wrote out some instructions for you to follow and your paycheck depended on your following them, you would put the effort into understanding them, wouldn't you? Even if they were a bit complicated. What if your Creator, your eternal Savior, left you some instructions? Well, He did.

And they are light in this world, not more darkness in need of being illuminated by a religious organization.

ARCHIVES

 

Your Name:


Your Email:

Your Number (optional):

  

 

 

 Want to chat about the Bible? 
           Have a question that's been on your mind? 
   Drop in for a chat!  

Of course, if you call ahead, you can make sure I'll be available. But sometimes calling ahead just seems like too much of a commitment, especially when you don't know what you're getting into. Sometimes, it's just easiest to act when the mood hits.

So if you're driving along Whitford Rd. during business hours, and the mood hits you, stop in! If I'm in the office, I'll eagerly do my best to make time for you!

Verse of the Day

All Rights Reserved 2006 ExtonChurchofChrist.org