Evolution is treated as a default starting point of all things living. It has been such for the past century. When I use the term “default”, I am saying that most scientists assume it is true. It is accepted without any question. We assume that the scientists involved are honest and truthful. But honesty and truthfulness are moral entities. Can morality and evolution coexist? That is the question
In the beginning evolution
We shall not attempt to go back to the “Big Bang”, but to the first life form. It supposedly somehow began in a warm pool of water some 3 or 4 billion years ago. That “somehow” is defined as the “chance” that all things necessary came together at just the right time. LIfe came into being at that point.
According to the evolutionary tale, it somehow reproduced itself propagating the next generation. This continued millions and billions of times. By “chance” this life form began to add complexity to its form. After millions of generations, it had become a different life form. We might say, a different species.
This process continued for millions and billions of years. Keep in mind that all this happened by “chance”. “Chance” is an undirected process which has no direction or goal in mind. But this is the foundation that evolution is founded on.
The odds of life from non-life
Just a note on the possibilities of life beginning without an intelligent source. Because of the number of proteins necessary and the processes contained in the “simplest” life form it is considered impossible. The odds are 1 in 10>1004 that life could begin from non-life. That number is 1 chance in the number 10 followed by 1004 zeros. That would cover the average 8×11 sheet with zeros.
Now, with odds such as that, we have exited the realm of science and entered a “belief system”. In other words, there are no viable avenues by which life could progress by “chance”. So, the progress of evolution is no longer logical or scientific but a “belief”, or a religion.
Does chance have a goal
Is chance goal driven? The correct answer is “No”. Without a goal, there is no guaranteed outcome. The outcome is what it is, not what was planned. When chance is involved the same situations may produce totally different outcomes.
Scientifically speaking, that would exclude evolution as a science. Science is based on knowing what a result will be because of certain scientific laws. “Chance” gives no guarantees.
What are morals?
Morals are a set of rules by which a society maintains its order and growth. By definition, morals should be absolutes and based on a higher authority. Authority is necessary to the foundation of morals. The authority on which they are based will provide the source of their sustenance.
Because morals are a foundation to a civilized society, they do not change. If they change with every new movement, then they are not moral. Such societies will collapse, and very soon.
So it seems that morality and evolution would be antagonists.
Morality and evolution
We have stated that morality is foundational principles of a society. Being foundational means that they do not change. Evolution, on the other hand, is based on “chance”. Chance is not foundational.
For an evolutionist to propose that morality evolves is a false statement. It is like saying you can build a skyscraper with a cloud as the foundation. “Chance” cannot evolve a foundation of morals that will sustain a society. If it accidentally did it would not last because evolution is ever evolving.
The unchanging is morality and evolution is the everchanging. The two cannot mix.
Can evolutionists believe in morality?
Many evolutionists will write treatises on how morality evolved. But the truth is, their morality is always changing.
The one thing that evolutionists promote that might resemble a morality is “survival of the fittest”. That particular morality has been set forth by several societies in the 20th century.
Among them were Hitler and the Nazi party of German. Hitler was a firm believer in Darwinism and evolution. He believed the Germanic race was the apex of human evolution. His morality said it was OK to murder more than 6,000,000 people because he thought they were inferior.
Even ahead of Hitler was Josef Stalin in Communist Russia. His evolutionary morality prompted him to exterminate almost 60,000,000 people. The morality of “survival of the fittest” was flexible enough for him to do this.
Let one more great evolutionist show how morality and evolution cannot co-exist. Mao Tse Tung of China exercised his evolutionary morality by killing over 100,000,000 Chinese people. It was OK because his world view allowed it.
Can evolutionists believe in morality?
If you believe that the answer to that question is, “Yes”, then you have an odd definition for morality. As I presented above, morals are for the good of society. The good of the whole society. Morals are standards of living which do not change with every new idea. If held to, they will produce good for the whole society, not just a few in a ruling class.
Evolutionists believe that only a few should benefit in their “moral” society. Of course, they are always part of the few. If you disagree with them, you are the “unfit”. Therefore, your elimination is “morally” OK for them. However, adjustments can be made to fit each new situation.
The correct answer to the question is that evolutionists do not believe in a permanent moral standard. Since situations are constantly changing, morality must change to fit them.
Examples of shifting morality
It used to be immoral to have sex outside of marriage. In modern society, this is the exception to the rule.
It used to be abhorrent to kill a baby in the womb(abortion). In today’s society, the government helps to pay for it.
In the past, there must be two or three witnesses to bring a charge against a person. Now, just enough “hearsay” can get years of investigations launched against innocent people.
How to stop shifting morality
There is only one way of stopping the shifting sands of modern morality. That way is to adopt a standard of morality that does not change. The very statement implies a standard that exists and has existed since time immemorial. Where can such a moral standard be found?
There is only one place that such a moral standard can be found.
The Holy Bible
Morality cannot be divorced from religion. There are many religions that propose some form of morality, but there is only does not change. The one that is rock solid is the moral standards set forth in the Holy Bible.
“Why is the Holy Bible moral standard better than any other,” you may ask?
The first reason is that it recognizes that human beings are by nature sinful. Their tendency is to do wrong. But, the Bible holds out hope as well as judgement. The morals promoted by the Bible have not changed since creation. They are the same today as they were yesterday or 4000 years ago when they were first penned.
Societies that have made Biblical morals their foundation have flourished. The most notable is the United States of America. The whole Constitution and government structure is based on the structures set forth in the Bible. The laws and morals that undergird our nation are based on the Bible. As long as we conformed to the morals of the Bible, the United States has flourished.
As society has embraced shifting morals we have seen the decline of the fabric of our nation. If we are to see a true return to greatness we must return to the moral standards set forth in the Bible.
Evolution, the destruction of morality
Evolution has been one of the tools that has been used to tear down our moral fabric. That is its main purpose. It is evident that logic and common sense would never embrace such a foolish concept as evolution.
We must return to the moral foundation on which our country was founded, or suffer its demise. The only true morality is that which is based on the Bible. To allow evolution to even have a foothold is to allow the destruction of our moral foundation.
The only hope of restoration to morality is found in one man. His name is Jesus of Nazareth. He is the Son of God, come in the flesh, to fulfill all the standards of God’s morality. He did it, and He offers you the same standing if you receive His gift of salvation. In Him, you are considered morally completely sufficient before your Creator.