Sexist and Racist? Darwin or Jesus?

Darwin or Jesus? Are Darwin and Jesus as opposed to one another as many are convinced? What does Darwinian evolution do for society? Can Darwinism free people from Jesus of Nazareth, the God of the Bible, and the Church? Shouldn’t Darwinian evolution be accepted by the mainstream to be scientific fact? Who can oppose it? Darwinian doctrines are welcomed as a dear advancement and a fundamental teaching of our children. No longer is mankind made in the image of the Biblical God as though Deity is the standard of goodness. Darwin reaches farther placing the value of humankind on a scale of development. The value of human life is changed. The purpose of humankind does not set our value, but rather our ability and state of evolution. Charles Darwin boldly asserted the social status of people by their evolution stating the position women and “negroes”.

Where does Charles Darwin put women and black people in the ranks of evolution? Darwin followed the reasoning of “The Origin of Species”. Writing in his work “The Descent of Man”, Darwin notes “savages” referring to “negroes”, Polynesians, and Australians in his descent of man. Darwin thought,

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla” (Darwin, Charles R. “On the Affinities and Genealogy of Man.” The Descent of Man. London: John Murray. Vol. 1. 1st ed. P.201).

Charles Darwin saw varying levels of evolution among the races. Don’t overlook Darwin’s reference to one race exterminating the savage races including the “negro” and the Australian. Yet, in such a word, it will be “a more civilised state”. On Darwin’s levels of evolutionary development, Caucasians are the highest and the “negro” and Australian are the closest to the gorilla.

Darwin or Jesus? I’m going with Jesus. Jesus and His disciples were not men of their time like Darwin’s advocates suggest for him. The Bible is in absolute opposition to racism. In both the Old Testament and the New Testament, believers of other ethnicities were accepted among God’s people. By the Spirit of Jesus Christ, Peter proclaimed in Acts 10:28, “You know how unlawful it is for a Jewish man to keep company with or go to one of another nation. But God has shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean.” Remember Jesus commanded, “While going, make disciples of all the nations [ethnei]” (Matt. 28:19).

Truly, “God shows personal favoritism to no man” (Gal. 2:6). Christians are to openly stand and oppose partiality and prejudice (Gal. 2:11-14). Paul wrote in Colossians 3:10-11, “and have put on the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of him that created him: where there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman; but Christ is all, and in all”. Race and ethnicity is not degraded by the Christian faith. The proclamation of the Apostle Paul affirms,

“[God] made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek God, if haply they might feel after him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us:” (Acts 17:26-27).

By the Christian Scriptures, there is no partiality from God for race or ethnicity in God’s judgment of the deeds of mankind.

“[T]ribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God” (Rom. 2:9-11).

What does Darwin conclude about the evolution of women? Darwinian Evolution tries to put women in their place. Again from “The Descent of Man”, Charles Darwin states,

Man is more courageous, pugnacious, and energetic than woman, and has a more inventive genius. His brain is absolutely larger, but whether relatively to the larger size of his body, in comparison with that of woman, has not, I believe been fully ascertained” (Darwin, Charles R. “Secondary Sexual Characters of Man.” In The Descent of Man. London: John Murray. Vol. 2. 1st ed. P.316-317).

The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shewn by man attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than woman can attain—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music, —comprising composition and performance, history, science, and philosophy, with half-a-dozen names under each subject, the two lists would not bear comparison” (Darwin, Charles R. “Secondary Sexual Characters of Man.” In The Descent of Man. London: John Murray. Vol. 2. 1st ed. P.327).

Was Darwin simply a man of his times as his advocates declare? I am not following Darwin, but his reasoning would make sense if you accept his conjecture of human evolution.

What about Jesus? Were not Jesus and His Apostles men of the times as well? Jesus teaches that both man and woman were created on the same day in the image of God (Mark 10:6, cf. Gen. 1:27, 5:2). In addition to being created in the image of God, woman is made to be the glory of man (1 Cor. 11:7). The ability of women is never limited in the Bible even though their roles are different from men by God’s blessing upon each sex. Differing roles do not change the equal value of either sex.

Women are baptized into the Church as much as men (Acts 8:12). Both woman and man are one and heirs of the blessings in Christ. “There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for you all are one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:27). Christian women prophesied teaching by revelation (1 Cor. 11:5). A righteous woman like Anna was a prophetess. Mary was blessed in bearing Jesus. Elizabeth was filled with the Spirit and spoke blessings to Mary. Women traveled and supported Jesus’ ministry (Luke 8), and women were the first witnesses of the resurrection of Christ (Luke 24:1-12). Dorcas led by example being full of good works and charitable deeds. Lydia owned her business. Elder women taught the younger women (Titus 2:3). Young women taught being given the gift of prophesy (Acts 21:9). Christian women are to rule the house (1 Tim. 5:14). Women owned property (Prov. 31). Women had rights. Jesus had to instruct women not to divorce their husbands (Mark 10:12).

Is the Bible no better than Darwin in promoting the oppression of women? Of certainty, this is not true. The New Covenant does teach that women are to be peaceable, not “silent” (1 Tim. 2:11), in learning. so are men that are learning. “Peaceable” that is often translated “silent” is the same word translated for all Christians to be “peaceable” in life (1 Tim. 2:2). Yes, the Spirit of Jesus Christ spoke through the Apostle Paul instructing Christian women not to rule or teach over men (1 Tim. 2:12). Would that not be a rebellious disposition for women to rule over men? That may be too disappointing for the pride of some now and in the midst of societies like Corinth and Ephesus where women did rule the pagan cults. Yet, the scriptures do not teach men or even church elders to Lord over women either (1 Pet. 5:1-4). Subordination is taught for men and women in different circumstance (1 Pet. 2:13ff). Women are instructed to choose to subordinate themselves to their Christian husbands, who were already commanded to love, cherish, and nourish their wives (Eph. 5:22ff), and Christian women are commanded by God to subordinate to this Christian man or to subordinate to an unbelieving husband to convert him (1 Pet. 3:1-2). That may offend some women, who do not prefer to conquer evil with good or are discouraged by the idea of submitting to the love, warmth, and care of a Christian husband. Never does Christian Scripture tell men to force or oppress women into subordination.

“Oh, but what about 1 Corinthians 14:34?” With Christian women being instructed to choose to subordinate to their husbands, they are also to allow their virtuous Christian men to lead. God blessed men with this birth right (1 Tim. 2:13). Therefore, Christian women are commanded by God not to speak out in the Assembly (1 Cor. 14:34-37). Men are also told not to speak out of order in the Assembly (1 Cor. 14:26-33). All because men have this separate function by birth right suddenly some feminine inclinations are appalled by all Christian virtues. All of this is as sexist as men being naturally excluded from bearing children and nursing. I know some women do not honor such a role. Many men do not honor their role to lead and fear doing so. Both sexes can be hesitant of their propriety. Yet, I find that the Creator of men and women knows more about their roles and nature than Darwin does. In the Christian scriptures, you’ll find no limit on the ability of women rather women being made in the glory of men having some separate gifts and instructions from God. God did create woman the very day that God created man and God saw that man needed help. Let us honor Christian women.

No matter one’s function in society, God has made all humankind one. Every good thing comes from God (Jas. 1:17). Maybe those, who are prejudice against the Apostle Paul, could think of honestly considering his words. The Spirit of Christ guided the Apostle Paul to state,

“For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith. For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them:” (Rom. 12:3-6).

Our abilities come from God as He blesses us. Our value is embedded in God, and not in climbing the tree of evolution to be the alpha ape.

Darwin or Jesus? Darwin’s morals are baseless and shameful. When we turn to Jesus Christ, we find the purest of morals and all established upon the proven convictions of faith. Jesus taught, “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35) and “And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise” (Luke 6:31). “Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven” (Luke 6:37). “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24). “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you” (Matthew 5:44). “When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind” (Luke 14:12-13).  “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:34-35). “Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends” (John 15:13).

How can evolution define love? According to evolution, love is either a survival instinct excluding free will, or love is a human invention not embedded in man? The Bible shows love to be eternal and the greatest virtue of God, so much that God is love (1 John 4:8, 16). Only the Christian Scriptures contain the most precise definition of love (1 Cor. 13, 1 John 2-4). You can wrangle with the Bible all day, and yet find no greater moral system. The Christian faith is the only religion based on sacrificial love. Rather we find Darwinists hatefully mocking the Christian symbol presenting Jesus to be God, the Son, and the Savior by adding legs to the ichthus fish (meaning: Jesus Christ is God, Son, and Savior).

The choice is yours. Darwin or Jesus? Darwin’s Evolution or Jesus’ Creation (Mark 10:6)? The likeness of an ape or the likeness of God’s image? Racism or faith in Christ? Sexism and God’s instructions?

About Scott Shifferd Jr.

Minister, church of Christ in Jacksonville, FL. Husband and father of four. Email: ScottJon82[at]yahoo.com
This entry was posted in Agnosticism, Christian and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Sexist and Racist? Darwin or Jesus?

  1. Mike says:

    This is foolishness. Darwin was sexist and racist. So what? So was George Washington. That has no bearing on his scientific ideas, which is all anyone is interested in. Are you not aware that a person can be right about one thing and wrong about something else? You, for instance, are probably right about what your name is but you are dead wrong on the facts about evolution.

    Like

    • Darwin based his racism and sexism upon his “scientific ideas”. Not that I am an advocate for George Washington, but his closest friend was a black man, who was his servant. That is strange. Yet, the implications of his biblical faith led him to release his servants via his death.

      Like

      • Ryan Kramer says:

        ??? This didn’t address what Mike was talking about. A worthwhile idea doesn’t always have the purest of origins. The whole point of this piece seems to try to discredit the theory of evolution by saying Darwin had some lousy personal characteristics that he inferred from his ideas. As Mike succinctly put it… so what? How does what you’re claiming make evolution any more or less true?

        Like

        • Where did the idea of evolution come from? Choosing between Jesus and Darwin, I’m going with Jesus. There is the purest origin and He affirmed that man and woman were created in the beginning rather than evolved. Jesus was not a liar. While Darwin’s idea wasn’t his own, ancient Egyptian mythology and Greek philosophers promoted the same idea of the evolution of species and life originating from non-living substance.

          Jesus, His Apostles, and the Law of Moses are morally trustworthy far beyond that of Darwin. The moral framework of biological evolution is degrading to humankind. Darwin’s words and reasoning show this. The evolution of species undermines the very basis of morality based in eternal virtues of love in which woman and man were created in God’s image, which is love. Otherwise, we are just evolved apes rather than highly created spirits in flesh.

          Like

  2. “Without the higher powers of the imagination and reason, no eminent success can be gained in many subjects. These latter faculties, as well as the former, will have been developed in man, partly through sexual selection,- that is, through the contest of rival males, and partly through natural selection,- from success in the general struggle for life; and as in both cases the struggle will have been during maturity, the characters gained will have been transmitted more fully to the male than to the female offspring. It accords in a striking manner with this view of the modification and re-inforcement of many of our mental faculties by sexual selection, that, firstly, they notoriously undergo a considerable change at puberty, and, secondly, that eunuchs remain throughout life inferior in these same qualities. Thus man has ultimately become superior to woman. It is, indeed, fortunate that the law of the equal transmission of characters to both sexes prevails with mammals; otherwise it is probable that man would have become as superior in mental endowment to woman, as the peacock is in ornamental plumage to the peahen.”

    Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, 2nd ed., John Murray, London, 1874, pp. 859-860.

    Pseudoscience at it’s finest. An atheist was recently ranting about how Christianity is inherently “misogynistic,” yet he never out pointed the misogyny many atheists and evolutionists. To me, omission can be just as dishonest and blatantly telling lies.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s