The Descent Of A Man

The Descent of a Man

A Creation Research Information Sheet

For a printer ready PDF version of this document please click here

This paper was originally circulated as an Evidence News Update in December 2010. The quotations are mainly taken from Darwin’s own writings, including several editions of the Origin of Species and his many other books and articles which are available from The Complete Works of Charles Darwin at: http://darwin-online.org.uk

Darwin’s letters are available from the Darwin Correspondence Project at: http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/home

Items in square brackets [ ] have been added for clarification.

1. 1844 ADMITTING HE’S LYELL’S DISCIPLE: During his time on the Beagle (1831 – 1836) Charles Darwin read Lawyer Charles Lyell’s book Principles of Geology. After returning to Britain, Darwin wrote to a friend and colleague about the effect of Lyell’s writings on his own research and writing: “I always feel as if my books came half out of Lyell’s brains & that I never acknowledge this sufficiently, nor do I know how I can, without saying so in so many words — for I have always thought that the great merit of the Principles [Principles of Geology] was that it altered the whole tone of one’s mind & therefore that when seeing a thing never seen by Lyell, one yet saw it partially through his eyes.” Letter to Leonard Horner, 29 Aug 1844.

ED. COM. It was only after Darwin took on Lyell’s world view of vast geologic ages that he could work out his own theory of evolutionary biology. The following excerpts from Darwin’s own writings show the resulting descent from the student who had some respect for the God of the Bible into the man who fully denied Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

2. 1830 CHARLES LYELL FREES SCIENCE FROM MOSES: “I am sure you may get into Q.R. [Quarterly Review] what will free the science [of geology] from Moses, for if treated seriously, the [church] party are quite prepared for it. A bishop, Buckland ascertained (we suppose [Bishop] Sumner), gave Ure a dressing in the British Critic and Theological Review. They see at last the mischief and scandal brought on them by Mosaic systems...

I conceived the idea five or six years ago, that if ever the Mosaic geology could be set down [put aside] without giving offence, it would be in an historical sketch, and you must abstract mine, in order to have as little to say as possible yourself.”

Charles Lyell: Letter to George Scrope [fellow uniformitarian geologist and Member of Parliament], 14 June 1830, in Lyell, K. [Lyell’s sister-in-law]. Life, Letters and Journals of Sir Charles Lyell, Bart. I:268-271. John Murray, London, 1881.

ED. COM. It comes as a surprise to many that there was a time when geologists actually accepted a Mosaic or Genesis framework to their thinking. Lyell the lawyer knew that no separation exists between a religion or philosophy and the way people look at the world around them, i.e. science. By advising his followers to reject and replace Moses, Lyell (who kept up the appearance of being a church supporting believer, as did most UK gentry of the day) was actually establishing an alternative history wherein the authority of the God of Moses over the real world of rocks, fossils and eventually all living things was ultimately rejected.

Since Jesus warned that those who reject Moses eventually reject His words (John 5:46-7), it shouldn’t surprise us that this is what actually happened to one of Lyell’s most devoted disciples, Charles Darwin.

3. 1859 DARWIN’S UTTER DEPENDANCE ON LYELL shows in his comment: “He who can read Sir Charles Lyell's grand work on the Principles of Geology, which the future historian will recognise as having produced a revolution in natural science, yet does not admit how incomprehensibly vast have been the past periods of time, may at once close this volume.” Darwin, 1859, Origin, Ch IX, p282

ED. COM. The Biblical history of the world sets out a clearly documented record of the origin and history of life that has the authority of a witness who was there. Lyell’s work gave Darwin the option of rejecting that authority and substituting it with his own. A vast incomprehensible past, undocumented by any witnesses, allowed Darwin to fill it with his own theories about the origin of life and of new and different life forms.

4. 1873 DARWIN ON LYELL’S METHOD: “Lyell is most firmly convinced that he has shaken the faith in the Deluge etc far more efficiently by never having said a word against the Bible, than if he had acted otherwise.”

Letter to his son George H Darwin, 21 Oct 1873

ED. COM. The Deluge refers to Noah’s Flood – a world wide catastrophe sent in judgement on man’s evil behaviour. Darwin, Lyell and their present day followers were, and are, not just rejecting God’s power as Creator, they reject His power and authority as Judge. The churches which pride themselves on not accepting Darwin’s evolution but accepting Lyell’s vast ages shoot the gospel in the foot. If there is no judgement of sin, there is no need to be saved.

By shaking faith in the Deluge, Lyell and his theological successors lull people into a dangerous ignorance of their perilous state unless they repent of their evil behaviour and accept the free gift of salvation offered by Christ.

5. 1851 “AFTER ANNIE'S DEATH, Charles set the Christian faith firmly behind him,” writes Randal Keynes, a great, great grandson of Charles Darwin in a biography of Darwin entitled “Annie's Box”. Annie was Darwin’s favourite daughter and Keynes' book, which focuses on Darwin's family life, was reviewed in Science, vol 296, p1974, 14 Jun 2002. The reviewer states, “Freed from the last vestige of belief that the world was perfect because God created it that way, Darwin continued without spiritual restraint to work out his theory on the origin of species.”

ED. COM. Since Keynes’ book was published many people have come to believe that grief over his daughter’s death gave Darwin the impetus to publish his inherently anti-God theory. However, the real turning point in Darwin’s life was some 20 yrs earlier when he adopted Lyell’s Moses-free world view. His grief over his daughter’s death was just one more step on an already well established path away from God.

Darwin's academic loss of faith in a good God because he saw a good God as incompatible with an evil world, reveals the essential flaw in all compromise creation positions that refuse to take Genesis as serious history (i.e. theistic evolution, framework theory and even “intelligent design”). These beliefs may superficially explain creative design, but they do not explain why the world is full of things that are not good, such as disease and death. There is a significant difference between something that doesn't function well because it was made by an evil or incompetent creator, and something that functions badly because it was corrupted after it was give into man’s control. Only Genesis gives a clear, consistent explanation of why the world is tainted by evil (man sinned), yet shows the vestiges of perfect design that are beyond chance. It also provides the background as to why Christ the Creator is the only one who can save us from the eternal penalty of our sin.

6. 1859 DARWIN’S GRAND VIEW OF LIFE The final paragraph of the first edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species, sums up his view of how all living things came into being. “It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in the largest sense, being Growth with Reproduction; Inheritance which is almost implied by reproduction; Variability from the indirect and direct action of the external conditions of life, and from use and disuse; a Ratio of Increase so high as to lead to a Struggle for Life, and as a consequence to Natural Selection, entailing Divergence of Character and the Extinction of less-improved forms.

Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”

Darwin, C. R. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray. [1st edition] pp490-491

ED. COM. An endless struggle for life, resulting in famine, death and extinction has only the deluded grandeur of a Stalinist war on the masses and is the exact opposite of God’s assessment of His finished creation: “And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good”. (Genesis 1:31) Genesis 1 and 2 describe a world of beauty and perfection where there was neither famine, nor struggle, suffering nor death. What God considered ‘good’ is confirmed by looking at the life of Jesus Christ, who as the Creator incarnate “went about doing good” (Acts 10:38) which covered Jesus feeding the hungry, healing the sick and raising the dead, the exact opposite of Darwinian methods. Those learned theologians who argue God used millions of years of death, disease and struggle to bring living things into existence, do nothing more than grossly insult the Creator and will pay for it dearly on the day when we are all judged by His word and not by the standards of Darwin or Dawkins .

7. 1876 DARWIN’S PROBLEM WITH SUFFERING: Darwin was aware of the dilemma between a good God and the observed suffering of living things. He wrote in his autobiography: “A being so powerful and so full of knowledge as a God who could create the universe, is to our finite minds omnipotent and omniscient, and it revolts our understanding to suppose that his benevolence is not unbounded, for what advantage can there be in the sufferings of millions of the lower animals throughout almost endless time?” Nora Barlow, ed. The autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: with original omissions restored. New York, W.W. Norton, 1969, p90

ED. COM. Darwin wrote his autobiography in 1876, although it wasn’t published until after his death. It was originally included in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin published by his son Francis in 1887. There were many omissions from the original manuscript, most of which seem to be at the request of Emma Darwin, his deeply religious Unitarian wife and all of which seem “designed” to make Darwin appear the acceptable English Church supporting gentleman.

8. 1876 DARWIN ON THE OLD TESTAMENT: In his autobiography Darwin describes his loss of trust in the Bible over the years as he worked on his evolutionary theory. “Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rainbow as a sign, etc., etc., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, (sic) or the beliefs of any barbarian.”

Nora Barlow, ed. The autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: with original omissions restored. New York, W.W. Norton, 1969, p85

ED. COM. “Manifestly false” is Darwin’s description of the Scriptures. Not metaphor or useful symbolism with theological truth. Darwin, who was trained in theology, did not indulge in any of the modern-day doublespeak by theologians who claim Genesis and evolution tell the same story. Darwin knew very well they didn’t, and because he believed his theory was true, he consistently also believed the Old Testament was false.

9. 1876 DARWIN ON THE GOSPELS: Having dismissed the Old Testament, Darwin then attacks the Gospels: “By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eyewitnesses;—by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation.”

Nora Barlow, ed. The autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: with original omissions restored. New York, W.W. Norton, 1969, p86

ED. COM. Darwin’s claim that the Gospel recordings of the memories of the disciples, who were actually there, “cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events,” should expose a major flaw in his own theory, written millions of years after supposed yet unseen events by a non-witness.

Evangelical Church leaders who claim that Creation, Noah’s Flood and the Tower of Babel are not salvation issues should take note of Darwin’s experience. Having rejected the foundation on which the New Testament is built, i.e. the original good creation, God’s judgement, and mankind’s inability to save himself as set out in the Old Testament, Darwin now rejects the good news (gospel) of the Creator coming to earth, showing His divine power and goodness in the miracles and dying to pay the penalty of our rebellion against Him.

10. 1876 DARWIN ON CHRISTIANITY: “Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. 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.”

Nora Barlow, ed. The autobiography of Charles Darwin, 1809-1882: with original omissions restored. New York, W.W. Norton, 1969, p87

ED. COM. Darwin understood Christianity well – it is about Heaven – and it is also about Hell and eternal judgement. Jesus spoke more on this subject than any other person in Scripture.

Here we see the reason many refuse to consider any evidence for creation and oppose the work of groups like Creation Research so vigorously. Like Darwin, they know that God’s authority and power to decide our ultimate fate rest exclusively on His role as Creator. By denying creation they think they can escape God’s judgement of their own lives. How sad that such people also fail to understand that God’s power and authority as Creator also enables the same God to save us from our rebellion against him and give everlasting life to all those who come in childlike faith and repentance.

11. 1879 DARWIN’S GOD: Although he rejected the Bible, Darwin does not reject the idea that there is a god: “It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist & an evolutionist. ... In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. - I think that generally (& more and more so as I grow older) but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind.”

Letter to John Fordyce, 7 May 1879

ED .COM. Darwin is right in that it is possible to be a theist, i.e. believe there is a god of some kind somewhere, and believe in evolution. However, you then have to ask the question: What kind of God would deliberately use a process of death, disease, famine and struggle to make the world and then declare it to be good? Atheist and Oxford Professor Peter Atkins called any god who would use evolution “a most malign god”. (Big Questions, BBC1, 8 Feb 2009) If this was the only god available, it is no wonder Darwin and Atkins do not want to know him. Darwin and Atkins are being more consistent in their beliefs than those who claim to believe in the God of the Bible, but reject God’s description of how He made the world.

12. 1880 DARWIN ON CHRIST: In November 1880 a man named Frederick McDermott, who declared himself to believe that “Christ was the Son of God,” wrote to Darwin, asking if Darwin also believed this, and if he believed in the New Testament. Darwin replied: “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.”

Letter to Frederick McDermott, 24 November 1880

ED. COM. Written eighteen months before Darwin died, this statement shows clearly Darwin’s complete rejection of God’s Word, and therefore, his rejection of God’s Son. Here is a tragic fulfilment of Jesus’ warning that; “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5:46-47) All who reject Moses (as Darwin did when he first chose to follow Lyell’s vast ages) will reject Christ’s words. Those theologians and Bible colleges which assume you can accept the millions of years without rejecting Christ, beware.

13. 1881 DARWIN ON MAN AND MONKEYS: Nine months before he died Darwin wrote about his views on mankind: “But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?”

Letter to William Graham, 3 July 1881.

ED. COM. By the end of his life Darwin is convinced man is just another animal that came into existence by the long and naturalistic struggle for survival. Therefore, he reasons, our thoughts are no more significant than those of the monkey-like creatures he believes we came from. This is in direct opposition to God’s description of man being such a separate unique creation, made in the image of God that we can share our thoughts with our Creator and our fellow human beings.

14. 1881 DARWIN ON MAN’S STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE: In the same letter as above Darwin goes on to say: “Lastly I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilisation than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risks the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is. The more civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilised races throughout the world.”

Letter to William Graham, 3 July 1881

ED. COM. Darwin, walking down the streets of London or Manchester and seeing the Islamic mosques would be horrified, as they are the evidence of the philosophic and religious vacuum his theory has made of English Culture, which other religions have moved in to fill. Darwin’s racism comes to the fore when he goes on to claim that the struggle for existence will keep going within mankind, and non-European races will eventually be selected out by Caucasians (Europeans). Not only is time proving him wrong, but his attitude is the direct opposite of Christ’s desire that all nations would become His disciples.

Jesus sent his disciples out with this commission: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matthew 28:19). The Apostle Paul explains why Christ has authority to claim disciples from all nations is because “From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.” (Acts17:26-27)

15. 1873 ON HOW BEST TO ATTACK CHRISTIANITY; Darwin wrote, “I have lately read Morley's Life of Voltaire & he insists strongly that direct attacks on Christianity (even when written with the wonderful force & vigour of Voltaire) produce little permanent effect: real good seems only to follow from slow & silent side attacks.”

Letter to his son George H Darwin, 21 Oct 1873

ED. COM. Theistic Evolutionists (TEs) often accuse atheists like Dawkins of hijacking Darwin for their own ends. TEs like to portray Darwin as a honest man who was confused by his daughter’s suffering. Describing the Gospel as a “damnable doctrine” and advising his son how to attack Christianity whilst praising Lyell (See 4 above) leaves the honest observer without doubt that Darwin, a Theology graduate, knew what he was doing.

16. 2000 DARWIN’S FAMILY LEGACY as his great, great grandson declares “I don’t believe in God: how could I, given my great, great grandfather’s theories? But perhaps I would feel happier if I did. Just because I have rejected conventional religion, it does not mean there isn’t a void to be filled.”

Sunday Times, (UK) 12 Nov 2000

17. 1882 DARWIN IS BURIED in Westminster Abbey where over the centuries much good theology has also been buried. His grave bears the simple inscription: Charles Robert Darwin, Born 12 February 1809, Died 19 April 1882.

Pall bearers at the burial service included Sir Joseph Hooker, Alfred Russel Wallace, James Russell Lowell (U.S. Ambassador), and William Spottiswoode (President of the Royal Society). On the Sunday following the burial service, Harvey Goodwin, Bishop of Carlisle, preached a memorial sermon and said: “I think that the interment of the remains of Mr Darwin in Westminster Abbey is in accordance with the judgment of the wisest of his countrymen…It would have been unfortunate if anything had occurred to give weight and currency to the foolish notion which some have diligently propagated, but for which Mr Darwin was not responsible, that there is a necessary conflict between a knowledge of Nature and a belief in God…”.

http://www.westminster-abbey.org/our-history/people/charles-darwin

ED.COM. In claiming that burying Darwin in a Christian church was a wise thing to do, the Bishop of Carlisle reveals much about the then leadership of the Anglican Church which was ignoring the Biblical teaching that, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10). Darwin rejected Christ, called himself an agnostic, regarded Scripture as manifestly false and advised people on how to undermine Christianity, but displayed remarkable faith in things that neither he nor Lyell saw.

In the Bible, faith is described as being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. (Hebrews 11:1) The creation evolution issue is not a matter of religion vs science, but a matter of truth vs error. It is also not a issue of science versus faith, but rather how all people interpret scientific findings in the light of the faith they willingly have. So what is your choice: faith in Lyell and Darwin, who were not there at the beginning, or faith in the Creator Christ who was there and has told us clearly what He did and better yet died for our sins and rose from the dead to show that He could raise us from the dead and give us life everlasting.

Creation Research UK Website Index
The Amen Website Home Page

If you have any comments you would like to make,
please email the domain owner.