Hate Mail

The only reason people believe in evolution [Darwin worship] is the hatred of GOD to the extent of throwing away what is true before their eyes. Evolutionists are atheists because they fear GOD’s control over their life and want to belive that they are in control so that they can enjoy the animal pleasures of sin without guilt.

I think the religious people — including many million Christians — who agree with the theory of evolution would disagree rather strongly with your point of view.

Clarifying my own position: I don’t hate God, I think that evolution is the best explanation for the evidence we see, and I’m quite moral, thank you very much.

Posted on August 15, 2008 at 3:06 pm by ideclare · Permalink
In: Evolution, Hate mail

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments via RSS

  1. Written by Anonymous Joe
    on August 20, 2008 at 9:32 pm
    Reply · Permalink

    Good evening. I am a Christian who stumbled across your website and began to read the reasons you stated for being an atheist. I have heard these before, and in response to your point of “I think evolution is the best explanation for what we see,” I have several disagreements. Evolution fails to answer the questions of how the universe came about, how living creatures could come from non-life, and how new genetic information could arise from one type of creature to another. The fact that the universe came into being by “chance” and species from “natural selection” fail to give the rightful credit to the God who created the heavens and the earth. Scientists cannot replicate the first cell, they cannot explain the “preCambrian explosion”, and cannot explain that if we are evolutionary creatures why we have a conscious and rationale that is able to distinguish right from wrong.

    I understand that you say you are quite moral, but we as humans are not moral. Anyone judged against the ten commandments or Jesus’s sermon on the Mount understand that we all fall short. My question for you is have you ever truly read the Bible? Have you read the Old Testament to witness how the story fits into the New Testament and the salvation of Jesus Christ? I will walk by comfortable faith in the truth that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, man sinned against God, God promised his chosen nation of Israel to bring forth a Messiah, and Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, lived a sinless life and died for our sins on the cross on Calvary. There is a heaven and a hell my friend, and the only way to get to heaven is to accept Jesus Christ as your savior. I’m not sure if anyone has ever told you this good news before, but I hope that you give this a careful decision…it has eternal implications.

    I just want to make a couple more points. Look at the miracle that is the Jewish people. The Roman empire destroyed the temple in 70 A.D. and they were dispersed from their homeland for nearly 2000 years. But God has brought them back into their homeland from the four corners of the earth! This was prophesized in the Bible just like Jesus’s first coming and his second coming. No civilization in history has survived the displacements and trials that the Jews have. And the reason they still exist is because they are God’s chosen people. If you’ve never read the Book of Revelation in the Bible I strongly encourage you to read it. I only have one more point to make. I read another article of yours and you said that there were eyewitnesses of Jesus’s miracles. If Christianity is just some hoax that people are fooled into, why did the early disciples and millions of people over history continue to be martyred for their faith? I think I can reasonably conclude the you would not die for holding to your atheistic principles, but yet millions have died for the sake of Jesus Christ. The reason is because this is the truth my friend, and if you have any questions, please email me as I believe everyone should know of the good news of Jesus Christ. God bless friend and I will be praying for you.

  2. Written by Jason
    on August 27, 2008 at 8:11 am
    Reply · Permalink

    Just wanted to point out that your first paragraph is just simple wrong.

    “Evolution fails to answer the questions of how the universe came about,…”
    The theory of evolution by natural selection does not attempt to explain how the universe came about. It only explains how life on our planet evolved/diversified from a common ancestor.

    “how living creatures could come from non-life,…”
    You’re talking about abiogenesis which some scientists include in evolution and some do not. Technically evolution by natural selection may only cover living things but that does not mean we don’t have ideas and theories about how life could have come from non-life. This has been demonstrated in labs multiple times. No one is claiming that science knows exactly how it happened or that we know exactly what the original conditions were that started life but the lab experiments demonstrate that it is in fact possible to change non-life into life by the creation of amino acids. So please don’t repeat this. It’s just wrong.

    “and how new genetic information could arise from one type of creature to another.”
    Not even sure what you mean here. I assume you’re talking about speciation. New genetic information doesn’t just arise from one creature to another. This is a well understood facet of evolution. It has been shown to happen multiple ways but the end result is usually the same. A subset group in a species has a mutation in their genetic code that provides some benefit which is passed on. Over a long enough time more mutations accumulate as the group changes in response to selective pressures. Eventually there is enough ‘genetic drift’ (i.e. their genetic code has changed over time) so that they can no longer breed with the original group. Hence a new species has evolved.

    “The fact that the universe came into being by “chance” and species from “natural selection” fail to give the rightful credit to the God who created the heavens and the earth.”
    The first part of your statement is a strawman since astrophysicists do not say that the universe came into being by ‘chance’. Maybe what you meant though was that theories about the beginning of the universe and theories about the evolution of life fail to give credit to God. If that is your proposition then I say, “so what?” Why should the pursuit of truth and knowledge through science give credit to a supposed supernatural being for which we cannot test or examine?

    “Scientists cannot replicate the first cell, they cannot explain the “preCambrian explosion”,…”
    As stated before it has been demonstrated in the lab multiple times that amino acids which are some of the simplest forms of life have been created from non-living chemicals, atmosphere, & electricity. Saying that scientists can’t replicate the first cell is a useless statement since they are not trying to replicate the first cell. Amino acids are not cells.
    As for the number of fossils during the Cambrian era you are again completely wrong. Scientists have many theories about why this happened. You are either ignorant of the theories or you’ve heard them and they don’t satisfy you. I would say either educate yourself about all the explanations or if you’ve heard them and you don’t agree…then provide a better explanation. And ‘NO’ saying ‘God did it’ is not an explanation. It can’t be tested, replicated, or falsified. It’s a nonsense comment because it shuts down critical thinking. If everyone in history had used your method of discovery we would still be in the dark ages. People like Copernicus and Galileo would have never asked the questions or challenged the general beliefs that the earth was the center of the universe or that we lived on a flat earth. Your method of just giving credit that God did something stops progress and that is dangerous. If I have to choose between saying, ‘I don’t know but I’m going to try to figure it out with science and observable evidence.’ and saying, ‘I know the answer and it’s because of God.’ then I’m going to choose the former every time. Because the goddidit argument is just intellectually lazy.

    and cannot explain that if we are evolutionary creatures why we have a conscious and rationale that is able to distinguish right from wrong.

  3. Written by Jason
    on August 27, 2008 at 8:24 am
    Reply · Permalink

    Forgot to cover your last segment.

    “…and cannot explain that if we are evolutionary creatures why we have a conscious and rationale that is able to distinguish right from wrong.”
    Again, not sure exactly what your argument is here but it sounds like you’re saying we don’t know why we’re conscious or moral. If that’s what you’re saying (correct me if I’m wrong) then again you’ve shown that you don’t really understand what science says about us and our evolve senses of morality or consciousness.

    Again there are several theories which do a pretty good job offering explanations as to why we are the way we are. One of the stronger evolutionary theories is that our sense of morality and compassion evolved just like everything else as a result of environmental pressures. Science says we evolved from an earlier form of primate that was closely relate with the ancestors of chimps and bonobos. (note that I’m not saying we evolved from monkeys or from chimps or any such nonsense that is often repeated by creationists.)
    Like other forms of primate we were social animals and we evolved rules for living in these groups which benefited our species. If we were nice to each other and took care of each other we were more likely to survive attacks from predators. Maybe some of our ancestors didn’t take care of each other and they were loners who stole food and did what they wanted. Chances are those traits would not have helped them reproduce. So it became an evolved trait that we had a rudimentary sense of ethics about how we acts in the social groups. As groups got bigger and more complex we would have needed more complex rules and sense of ‘morality’ to keep the society from breaking down. This is completely plausible as an explanation for the beginnings of morality as we see it and it does not require me to invoke a god to explain it. And that is Occam’s Razor. I’m not saying this theory is 100% accurate and no one else is either but it’s a good start and similar rudimentary ethics in other social animals. These are lines of evidence which point to an explanation.

  4. Written by Jon McCulloch
    on September 17, 2008 at 9:54 am
    Reply · Permalink

    “Scientists… cannot explain that if we are evolutionary creatures why we have a conscious and rationale that is able to distinguish right from wrong”

    Err. I’m afraid Michael Shermer’s “The Science of Good & Evil” does a very good job of doing exactly this, once more leaving us not needing your big invisible friend in the sky.

    — Jon

  5. Written by kels
    on October 8, 2008 at 7:38 pm
    Reply · Permalink

    I don’t understand why we are all so naive and confident as to assume that we must and do know everything right here, right now. You all have nice long rants about “Why we are” and “Scientists cannot replicate”: How “evolution fails” and “right from wrong”. Does anyone else (except myself, obviously) believe that we are all, in fact, ignorant? That evolution does not provide answers, but rather provides a question? That the idea of religion is close minded and stagnant, and the only refutation of evolution they provide is that it is changeable? And the evidence for evolution! Atheists shove “facts” into everyone’s faces, attempting time after time to disprove all Christianity in one final swoop, contradicting the very basis of itself, in that facts are never actually facts, and may never actually be facts, but are merely ideas that place hold for the next fact.
    I’m an atheist, i agree with much of what some of you are saying. i still think you’re ignorant.

  6. Written by Unnamed
    on October 12, 2009 at 7:16 am
    Reply · Permalink

    hi there..

    @joe anonymous

    solve the math..

    abacus to computer/laptop

    science is great…

    if darwin is wrong..

    then can u explain me…

    10 commandment was made by jesus christ…

    but how Egyptian write thier own commandment ( not exactly as 10 commandments) but there are same meaning…

    see book of the dead (egytian book)
    it was wrote 3000 years b4 your jesus christ born..

    and if u will tell me.. god wrote it to egytian..

    your wrong

    because pharaoh.. or king of the egyt who wrote their commandments..

    NOTE: there is 100+ commandment written their… not only 10

    disappointing?

    2nd..

    try to explain Adan and Eve VS nature?

  7. Written by BrandeX
    on January 17, 2010 at 3:41 am
    Reply · Permalink

    “Look at the miracle that is the Jewish people. The Roman empire destroyed the temple in 70 A.D. and they were dispersed from their homeland for nearly 2000 years. But God has brought them back into their homeland from the four corners of the earth!”
    No… that was the Americans, not god.

  8. Written by crickets
    on September 14, 2010 at 11:59 am
    Reply · Permalink

    @ Brandex

    “No… that was the Americans, not god”

    distressingly common mistake though =/

    god must be fat and white

Subscribe to comments via RSS

Leave a Reply