Richard Dawkins, the Apostle of Darwinian Atheism, is repelled by social Darwinism (natural selection/eugenics) and calls himself a â€œcultural Christian.â€ He even argues that the King James Bible should be preserved as one of the great literary masterpieces of the English language and that it should not be hijacked by the Church. He even admitted: â€œThere are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings. I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death. I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse.â€ (1.Ruth Gledhill, Scandal and schism leave Christians praying for a â€˜new Reformationâ€™, The Times (UK), 2 April 2010)
Among the first hijackers were liberal Protestant theologians and biblical critics such as Schleiermacher, von Harnack, Fr. Alfred Loisy, a French theologian and Scripture scholar, and Fr. George Tyrrell, an Irish-born Protestant who became a Catholic and a Jesuit, though he was dismissed from the Jesuits in 1906. These heretics were profoundly influenced by the nineteenth-century studies of Kant and Hegel, the evolutionary theories of Darwin, and certain revolutionary political movements in Europe. Their interpretative approach to Scripture resulted in the reduction of the living, personal God to a pantheistic expression of the cosmic evolutionary process in all its manifestations.
In 1907 Pope Pius X dubbed theological liberalism 'Modernism.' In his encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis the Pope declared that Modernism together with it's principle doctrine evolution is â€œthe synthesis of all heresiesâ€
Along with Pope Pius X there were a good many intrepid and honest souls in the nineteenth century, including the English theologian G.H. Pember and the English Catholic priest Robert Hugh Benson who understood that the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo and the doctrine of evolution were in direct conflict and would result in the radical reinterpretation of the Bible should the Church accept evolution.
Their fears were realized when forty-three years after Pope Pius X, the evolution heresy found an opening into the Roman Catholic Church when Pius XII cautiously stepped away from Pius Xâ€™s unflinching stand.
Today evolutionary thinking has entered into and polluted the entire body of the Church, from Roman and Eastern Orthodox Catholicism to mainline Protestantism and Evangelicalism. The injury to Christian convictions is incalculable, said Dr. Albert Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:
" At the very least, the acceptance of evolutionary theory requires that the first two chapters of Genesis be read merely as a literary rendering that offers no historical data. But, of course, the injury does not end there. If evolution is true, then the entire narrative of the Bible has to be revised and reinterpreted. The evolutionary account is not only incompatible with any historical affirmation of Genesis, but it is also incompatible with the claim that all humanity is descended from Adam and the claim that in Adam all humanity fell into sin and guilt. The Bibleâ€™s account of the Fall and its consequences is utterly incompatible with evolutionary theory. The third chapter of Genesis is as problematic for evolutionary theory as the first two." (Creation vs. Evolution â€” The New Shape of the Debate, Dr. Mohler, February 1, 2011)
In its most common form, the accomodation of the Bible with the evolution heresy amounts to "theistic evolution," the idea that the evolutionary process is guided by God to accomplish his divine purposes.
Ross Douthat, author of "Bad Religion" falls within this category. Using Dawkins words, Douthat is a hijacker who has reduced Scripture, beginning with the Genesis account to mere metaphor in order that he can accomodate the Bible with the idea that man finally appeared after "millennia upon millennia of evolution."
In a scathing attack, Dawkins pointed out that if Ken Ham, Dr. Albert Mohler, and other faithful believers, or â€˜fundamentalists' as Douthat dismissively labels them, did not take the,
â€œâ€¦stories pretty literally, including the tales of Noah and the flood, the Genesis stories, the tale of Adam and Eve and their Original Sin, and, of course, the whole Jesus mythology (then) weâ€™d have no creationism in America, and the story of Jesus would be a convenient fairy tale, like that of Santa Claus, rather than an object of universal veneration.â€ (Dawkins to Christian Writer Ross Douthat: Are You Saying what You Really Believe? http://patriotsandliberty.com/?p=18576 )
Zeroing in on Douthat's hypocrisy, Dawkins observed,
"I'm pretty sure that when he goes to Mass each week he recites the Nicene Creed, affirming his belief in these â€œtruths" and then asked, â€œTell me, Mr. Douthat: are those allegories, too? When you mouth them in Church each week, are you saying what you really believe? If not, why do you call yourself a Catholic?â€ (ibid)
The latest hijacker is Timothy Keller. Sounding like Douthat, Keller argues that the first problem evolution presents for Protestants is that,
â€œto account for evolution we must see at least Genesis 1 as non-literal..â€ and adds "that believing that evolution happened as a biological process does not necessarily mean that one has to embrace the â€œGrand Theory of Evolutionâ€ involving naturalism and social Darwinism." (A response to Timothy Kellerâ€™s â€˜Creation, Evolution and Christian Laypeople,â€™ Lia Cosner, 9 September 2010
As Dawkins made clear, if the faithful did not take the Genesis account "pretty literally (there would be) no creationism in America, and the story of Jesus would be a convenient fairy tale." Over and across the entire denominational spectrum, it is the faithful described by Dawkins, the ones who stand firm against evolution who are harshly criticized, ridiculed, and condemned for their simplistic theology, narrow-mindedness, fundamentalism, cultural isolationism, and anti-intellectualism, among other things. Attackers, both secular atheist and evolutionary theist point specifically to the rejection of evolution, which they call,
â€œthe rejection of science,â€ and then refer to this as â€œtextbook evidence of an unyielding ignorance on the part of the religious.â€ (Total Capitulation: The Evangelical Surrender of Truth, Dr. Mohler,October 25, 2011)
Darwinism is not empirical science but rather an evolutionary cosmology that seeks to understand and account for the strictly physical origins and evolution of the Universe, the spontaneous generation of life from chemicals (abiogenesis), the origin, structure, and ultimate fate of the Universe at large, as well as the natural laws of evolution and matter that determine everything about it.
Anthropologist Henry Fairfield Osborn, longtime director of the American Museum of Natural History reveals that Darwin is not its' originator but rather ancient pagans are. In the introduction to his history of evolutionism Osborn wrote:
"When I began the search for anticipations of the evolutionary theory....I was led back to the Greek natural philosophers and I was astonished to find how many of the pronounced and basic features of the Darwinian theory were anticipated even as far back as the seventh century B.C." (Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin, p. xi)
As for abiogenesis, in their more candid moments, evolutionists generally admit that the spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter is a highly improbable event. So unlikely is it that today some naturalists such as SETI researcher Paul Davies and Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the DNA molecule, have abandoned it in favor of panspermia.
Panspermia is the idea that life on earth was accidentally seeded by meteorites containing the essential building blocks of life or perhaps by highly evolved extraterrestrials who for billions of years have been guiding the evolution of man.
Christendom and Protestant America arose on the wings of the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo, the Biblical account of man created in the spiritual image of God, his fall and subsequent sinful condition and God's Moral Law.
Christendom's fall was traced by Richard Weaver in his book, "Ideas Have Consequences," (1945). The fall began, said Weaver, when Western man made an "evil decision" to abandon his belief in the transcendent God and universals (unchanging truths, Moral Law) and thus the position that,
"there is a source of truth higher than, and independent of, man (with the result that) there is no escape from the relativism of 'man is the measure of all things." (The Conservative Intellectual Movement in America, George H. Nash, pp. 32-33)
If the living God does not exist, then man---including liberal theologians---is the measure of all things, thus the way is clear for the compromise of Scripture---to hijack God's Revelation. And this is what liberal theologians have been doing from the 18th century to our own with the consequence that a stunning spiritual transformation of consciousness has shifted Western and American thinking away from the living God and biblical religion and toward a "new" very dark, occult-spiritual pagan religion of evolution, the truly demonic "worse thing" that "Christianity might be a bulwark against," to use Dawkins words.
In his book, "The Making of the New Spirituality: The Eclipse of the Western Tradition," James Herrick calls this new paganism the "New Religious Synthesis" and briefly outlines seven of its components:
1. History (as well as unchanging truth and moral absolutes) has no spiritual significance. This is because the idea of continuous evolutionary change makes them absurd.
2. The supremacy of omniscient reason, mystical mind-powers, intuition, and collective consciousness.
3. The spiritualization of science. Since the empirical study of the material universe employs reason to acquire knowledge, and reason is not physical but rather spiritual, today it is acknowledged that reason is in fact acquiring spiritual knowledge.
4. Animated nature (animism). The natural dimension is alive with energies, divine spirit, Zoe, god-soul, and consciousness.
5. Gnosis, or esoteric knowledge, the provenance of spiritual elites and extraordinarily gifted individuals, including some scientists.
6. Spiritual evolution. Through control and direction of their own spiritual evolution certain naturally selected humans are destined to realize unimaginable spiritual advances. Spiritual or conscious evolution leap frogs off of Darwin's' biological theory and will supposedly lead to actual human divinity.
7. Religious syncretism rooted in common mystical experiences and telepathic revelations from disembodied intelligences. (Herrick, pp. 33-35)
So complete has the transformation been that evolutionary thinking has successfully inverted the order of creation and reversed the direction of Biblical theism. With creation ex nihilo virtually replaced by evolution, it is now believed that men have not fallen from perfection but instead are gradually evolving upward from their ape beginnings toward greater and greater spiritual perfection. Self-perfecting man no longer needs the living, supernatural God as the idea of "conscious evolution" means he can save himself, and perhaps even attain god-hood.
English Catholic theologian Robert Hugh Benson (1871-1914) was a brilliant visionary who foresaw the stunning events we are witnessing today â€” the wholesale rejection of Truth tied to the fall of Westerners into idolatry (man is the measure of all things) and paganism influenced and directed by a demonic outpouring effecting a transformation of consciousness in tandem with the rise of the New Religious Synthesis.
Benson was not deceived by the scientific pretensions of the evolutionary cosmology, leading him to describe it as "quiet pantheism." In his visionary masterpiece, "Lord of the World" he predicted that evolutionary thinking would prepare Westerners, Americans and apostate theologians not only to embrace the 'new' pagan religion but to worship and adore Antichrist, for this human-god (Mr. Felsenburgh) is the first perfected product of nature and evolutionary forces. Mr. Felsenburgh has arisen in America and he is,
"....the first perfect product of that new cosmopolitan creation to which the world has labored throughout its history..." (p 85)
Unless Timothy Keller humbles himself and repents, he will inevitably unite with the crucifiers of the faithful. Worse, he may find himself welcoming Mr. Felsenburg.