God's Not Dead: Evidence for God in an Age of Uncertainty (17 page)

Christopher Hitchens addressed his audiences as “my fellow
primates.”
²¹
Richard Dawkins claims he is “an African ape”
²²
and that we are all African apes as well. If that’s what we really are, then we should simply get over it and admit it. Remember, if Darwinian evolution is really the true story of our origins and we were not designed or intended as anything special, then we must also jettison any notion of having any special place in the universe. Our sense of importance or distinction is just an illusion. Furthermore our death is no more tragic than that of any other animal. How arrogant of us to think our fate is any different after death than that of a cow or a pig.

H
UMAN
E
VOLUTION
: A M
ATTER
OF
I
NTERPRETATION

The main reason many believe humans are indistinct from other animals is that the theory of evolution claims we evolved from a common ancestor of modern primates millions of years in the past. This claim has historically been supported by pictures showing several stages of a monkey gradually evolving into a human. However, these pictures are quite misleading. Paleontologists have found various fossils that share different characteristics with humans. But interpretations of these specimens rely more on evolutionists’ imaginations than on hard evidence. As biologist Jonathan Wells noted,

According to paleoanthropologist Misia Landau, theories of human origins “far exceed what can be inferred from the study of fossils alone and in fact place a heavy burden of interpretation on the fossil record—a burden which is
relieved by placing fossils into pre-existing narrative structures.” In 1996, American Museum of Natural History Curator Ian Tattersall acknowledged that “in paleoanthropology, the patterns we perceive are as likely to result from our unconscious mindsets as from the evidence itself.”
²³

As mentioned in
chapter 5
, new species typically appear suddenly in the fossil record with massive gaps separating them from their closest theoretical ancestors. The fossils connected with
human evolution
follow this same pattern. They are either fairly apelike or fairly humanlike, and the transition between the two groups took place suddenly without a clear progression of intermediate forms. “It appears that our own species, in particular, is the product of a remarkable event of quantum [massive changes taking place quickly] speciation.”
²⁴
This fact is also stated objectively by Stephen Gould: “Moreover, we still have no firm evidence for any progressive change within the hominid species.”
²⁵

Given the problems with the fossil record, evolutionists often attempt to bolster their case with evidence from
DNA
. For instance, they often cite the fact that human and chimpanzee DNA share
pseudogenes
, which are genes with the same
genetic
errors. Several committed Christians, such as Francis Collins, claim that this evidence seems very compelling, so they have argued that evolution is compatible with Christianity.
²⁶
However, even if God used an evolutionary process in the development of life, that process would still need to have been directed intelligently. For instance, the reprogramming required to create the human brain and the many other distinctly human characteristics would not have been possible in a geologically short time span by any undirected process. Moreover, pseudogenes and
similar
junk DNA
shared by humans and other species have been shown to have actual functions, so common design then provides an equally valid explanation for the similarities.
²⁷
Therefore, the cumulative evidence in no way supports the claim that humans gradually evolved from some apelike creature by the blind forces of nature.

T
HE
V
IOLENCE IN THE
A
NIMAL
W
ORLD

The survival-of-the-fittest programming in the animal world is replete with aggression and death. Of all the species that have ever lived, 99.9 percent are now extinct. Just watch any show that highlights the traits of animals in the wild. The predators stalk their prey and attack in order to eat and survive. We watch these shows with fascination, but with no sense of
moral
outrage, when a lion runs down an antelope and eats it for dinner. We may cringe at the gory sight of a shark eating a tuna, but we don’t call 911. A lion shouldn’t feel sorry for its animal nature, so should we as humans resist or seek to modify natures? How could we if we are only animals?

Atheists are committed to the belief that we are simply another form of animal. Our
instincts
and behaviors should, therefore, be treated as simply programmed and determined by our DNA. It’s ironic that there is protest from the ranks of skeptics when the implications of evolution on philosophy and ethics are pointed out. If it’s true, then why pretend it’s not? If God is dead, then we are simply another species subject to the laws of natural selection. Men like Hitler couldn’t be ultimately evil because they were merely acting out their innate evolutionary
instincts. How could you judge anyone harshly for acting on their instincts and impulses when that’s just who they are? Skeptics are quick to use adjectives such as
cowardly
when they spot people denying the implications of their own beliefs, yet Dawkins and others fail again and again to own up to their own. As Ravi Zacharias said, “One of the great blind spots of a philosophy that attempts to disavow God is it’s unwillingness to look into the fact of the monster it has begotten and own up to being its creator.”
²⁸
This philosophy had a monstrous impact on the twentieth century and proved once again that man’s problems are solved not by trying to eliminate God but by believing and obeying Him.

S
PECIESISM

Humanism was the attempt to make humanity the “measure of all things.” In short, we don’t need God but could establish truth on the basis of reason alone.
Speciesism
is the elevation of one species over another: “ ‘Speciesism’ is the idea that being human is a good enough reason for human animals to have greater moral rights than non-human animals.”
²⁹
This is taking animal rights to a whole new high while bringing humans down to a new low. Shockingly, this kind of logic seems to get a free pass. One of the chief proponents of this is Peter Singer, an avowed atheist. He has certainly made the logical connection that if man is simply another animal, then we shouldn’t assume we are better than any other animals. His book
Animal Liberation
is the foundational work of the animal rights movement. “So out of concern for both fish and human beings we should avoid eating fish. Certainly those who continue to eat fish while refusing to eat other animals
have taken a major step away from
speciesism
; but those who eat neither have gone one step further.”
³⁰

Jesus loved the
animals
He created; but according to this
logic
, by feeding thousands of people fish, He was a speciesist. Certainly animals should be treated humanely; this is a command of
Scripture
:

A righteous man cares for the needs of his animal,
but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel.

—P
ROVERBS
12:10
NIV

This thinking leads to unbelievable comparisons between the slaughterhouses where animals are processed and the gas chambers of
Auschwitz
, a leap into absurdity. Theoretically we shouldn’t feel outrage when humans act like animals or are treated like animals, but we do. Why? Because deep down we know there is a difference. It’s the same reason why the accidental death of an animal on a highway isn’t treated as a crime scene. In the same way, the breakfast bar at Shoney’s isn’t treated as a grotesque celebration of the mass murder of swine.

D
IFFERENCES
B
ETWEEN
H
UMANS AND
A
NIMALS

We are different from other animals, and we know it. The problem is evolution
and atheism
have no explanation for these differences.

1. T
HINKING
A
BOUT
T
HINKING

Transcendent thought means that we as humans are able to think about thinking. It is called
metacognition
. It was
eighteenth-century philosopher René Descartes who said, “
Cogito, ergo sum
,” which means “I think; therefore, I am.” As a result, we can ponder our condition from an almost-objective position, to think about ourselves in comparison to others, to be self-conscious of our weaknesses and our strengths. This capacity allows us to be philosophical. It also allows us to think generationally, to demonstrate concern for our family lineage. This ability is beyond the animal instinct to care for their offspring.

2. A
ESTHETIC
R
ECOGNITION

We appreciate the aesthetic values of
beauty
, art, and other concepts such as nobility and honor. Dawkins admits this as well: “We are hugely different from other animals in that we have
language
, we have art, we have mathematics, philosophy. We have all sorts of emotions that other animals probably don’t have.”
³¹
Today we don’t find even crude drawings on the dwellings of animal caves that are made by the animals themselves. Though they can be trained to imitate human behavior in some respects, it is a far cry from the human ability we see in art museums and libraries.

3. L
ANGUAGE

“Human language appears to be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal world.”
³²
Parrots may be able to mimic human sounds, but they aren’t communicating their own thoughts and ideas about their own existence. If that were the case, you might hear them complaining about the food or debating the justice of cages for their fellow parrots. Animals can respond to human voice commands, but these are simply
adaptive traits that are conditioned through the reward of food for the performance of an act or response to a command.

Celebrated linguist Noam Chomsky points out that humans have a
language
acquisition device (LAD) that animals lack.
³³
Not only do we have the mental capacity for advanced thought, but we also have unique centers in the brain designed specifically for both language production and language processing. Moreover, our larynx is uniquely designed to create complex sound patterns required for advanced speech. This ability is not found in the animal world, only in humans.

4. C
REATIVITY AND
S
CIENTIFIC
E
XPLORATION

Humans have not only the mental capacity for creating tools but also an advanced visual system to learn about the outside world. We have hands uniquely designed for complex, intricate motor tasks. We have the ability to take the world around us and make new things, such as iPhones. As Michael Denton wrote in
Nature’s Destiny
, “In addition to our brain, our linguistic ability, and our highly developed visual ability, we possess another wonderful adaptation, the ideal manipulative tool—the human hand. No other animal possesses an organ so superbly adapted for intelligent
exploration
and manipulation of its physical surroundings and environment.”
³⁴

An additional advantage is our bipedal (using only two limbs) posture and the ability to walk upright. These features allow us to manipulate tools while moving. This unique combination of multiple features allows us to explore the world and to develop technologically. “It is only because our brain can sense and experience the world and translate our thoughts into actions that we are able to explore, manipulate, and ultimately understand the world.”
³⁵

5. M
ORALITY

As humans we are able to act beyond our instincts. There are certainly herd instincts and tribal taboos within the animal world, but nothing that compares with human
morality
. The best way to illustrate this wide gap is through a pet hamster we owned. It was an exciting event when that hamster had babies. My kids were so excited and gave each of them a name. A few weeks later tragedy struck. We woke up one morning to find one of the baby hamsters missing. For a moment we searched frantically to try and locate the missing hamster. But then the unthinkable became apparent. The mother had eaten one of her babies. I was outraged. Needless to say, that was the last hamster we ever owned.

A moral framework can be seen in virtually every culture. For instance, nearly all people groups recognize the importance of honesty, honoring property, and respecting the marriage covenant. These values do not correspond well with the
Darwinian
drive to outsurvive one’s neighbors. However, they are consistent with the view that all people are the result of a loving God, who wishes for people to live in harmony.

6. H
IGHER
I
NTELLIGENCE

Remember the famous illustration of how improbable it would be for a room full of monkeys to produce the works of Shakespeare? Former atheist Anthony Flew said that they actually put the monkeys in a room for months, and they weren’t able to produce one word. “There is an enormous difference between life and intelligent life. I don’t mean clever crows or dolphins, but minds capable of self-awareness and of developing advanced technologies—that is, not just using what’s at hand but transforming materials into
devices that can perform a multitude of tasks.”
³⁶
Logic and reasoning are hallmarks of this ability in humans and cannot be accounted for as arising spontaneously from natural processes.

7. P
ERSONHOOD