Skip to main content

Doing Evil in the Name of Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
(Material added 24 February 2024.)

When Christians point out that the mass murderers of the 20th century were atheists (Hitler was a pantheist who believed nature was "god"), misotheists with things like, "Prove to me that Stalin said he did atrocities in the name of atheism!" Not in those words, but they hated the God of the Bible and had no consistent moral foundation to inconvenience their consciences.

In a similar way, one would have a difficult time finding a scientist who says, "I am using science for evil!" Scientists are not blank slates driven by data. They are as corrupt or virtuous as everyone else, subject to operating within their worldviews.

Scientists are not blank slates, they are as corrupt or virtuous as anyone else. Many have used the name of science to justify evil actions.
Open Clipart / Olga Bikmullina

Professing Christians should be honoring God and following what he has revealed in the Bible. Those who are unregenerate (John 3:6-7, 2 Cor. 5:17) are unable to discern the things of God (John 8:44, 1 Cor. 2:14, 2 Cor. 4:4, Rom. 12:2). We cannot expect unbelievers to have spiritual insight and wisdom, and the idea of "neutral ground" or "leave the Bible out of it" is in opposition to God's Word.

These are reasons why we cannot simply present evidence for the existence of God, refute evolution, affirm special creation — and divorce them from a biblical framework. This does not mean that Christians and creationists must use the Bible as a science textbook! Instead, God's Word should not be left out of discussions.

This is a big problem with the Intelligent Design movement. By leaving God out of it, they make no commitment as to the identity of the Designer. It is a "big tent" that includes young-earth creationists, people of various religious beliefs, and agnostics. I'll allow that some people can be convinced by the evidence, but in the Christian worldview, God can use faulty reasoning to bring people to him. That is because the Holy Spirit is at work; our arguments and presentations do not save people (1 Cor. 2:1-5).

In short, the biblical worldview presupposes the truth of God's Word, and the materialistic worldview presupposes that there is no God. We cannot win people to Christ by denying what God says about them.

There can be no denying that much evil has been done in the world under the pretense of conducting scientific studies, or appealing to what "science says." People operating from a God-denying worldview have developed "scientific racism", allowed for abortion ("It's just a blob of cells" or appealing to Haeckel's fraudulent drawings of embryos are two examples), horrific genetic experiments, and much more.

They are using the name of science to do evil. In addition, scientists are products of their worldviews and their cultures. Nazi scientists conducted experiments on people in concentration camps, secular scientists are pushing the boundaries of ethics, and so on. Racism existed before Darwin, but his work increased it and made it respectable. Of course, white Europeans were the biggest proponents of scientific racism and eugenics, but any ethnicity can be racist; being non-white does not grant someone immunity to the charge.

Even though I stated my disagreement with the ID community, there is no denying that they have excellent refutations of atoms-to-atheist evolution. Casey Luskin and Professor Richard Weikart are ID proponents, but Weikart is a historian and has written some excellent material on Hitler's pantheistic religion. He also shows that Darwinism was instrumental in Nazi policies. Although Luskin naively says that scientists are growing out of racism, that is not the case.

The discussion in this podcast touches on several subjects in its half hour, but there are several nuggets to gather and polish up. Also, it is the inspiration for this article, and you can see how worldviews influence the behaviors of scientists. Give a listen to "Richard Weikart on Scientific Racism and the War on Humanity." It's from 22 November 2021. After I wrote this, several more posts and recording in ID the Future from Professor Weikart appeared. Instead of listing them, you can look your ownselves at this link, and listen to more with him ID the Future at this link. If you've a mind to.

Popular posts from this blog

Smoking that Doobie, Brother

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Many countries, especially on the western side of the Atlantic, have decriminalized cannabis (weed, pot, doobies, grass, smoke, reefer, whatever) and legalized it for medical use. Many places have made recreational use legal as well. Even where illegal, enforcement of laws is often sporadic . And there was great rejoicing among pot smokers. In fact, here in not-all-that-far-upstate New York, cops don't care. Polly Pothead in the apartment next door was chugging away so much, the smoke could be seen not only in the hallway, but seeped into our own apartment. Police did nothing. That was before it was legal, but her usage is the same as before; smoking wacky tobaccy just wasn't important enough to enforce the law. Also, she's a terrible conversationalist. One article I found in my research mentioned that Mary Jane was originally illegal because it is harmful. (Oh, come on! Don't get a burr under your saddle. You know it's true. People who argue

The Secular Science Industry Propagandizes Same-Sex Attraction

We are told that the peer review process in the secular science industry is a method of providing truth and accuracy, and ensuring correct procedures were followed in submitted papers. That sounds like a mighty good idea, but peer-reviewed papers are often bad,  downright fraudulent, or hoaxes . Homosexual activists passed a peer-reviewed paper in  Science  magazine, but that should not have happened. It was fake science research, and  Science  was embarrassed by the fraudulent tactics. The secular science industry did not seem to learn from this. Assembled with images from Open Clipart After the Science  humiliation and the "We're so sorry if we've caused you any pain, Uncle Albert, and boy, does this hurt the credibility of science itself in the public eye" schtick, the disastrous Obergefell decision by the US Supreme Court struck. (That is one reason I believe we're under divine Judgment .) After that ruling, the militant Gaystapo cut loose with harassing peopl

The Long and Short of Haircut Gratuities

The familiar barber shop pole with its red, white, and blue stripes is easily recognizable as a place for a haircut and other services. As in other places, a man in the old West could stop in for a haircut and shave, and finish with some bay rum after shave. Many years ago, barbers also performed surgeries, hence the red and white stripes on the pole. Eventually, they only medically-related practices they performed were tooth extractions and the barbaric practice of bloodletting. Credit: Pexels / cottonbro On a side note, by ignoring Leviticus 17:11, bloodletting contributed to the demise of President George Washington. There were many factors in his illness, but since the life is in the blood , he may have survived it if they had left more of it in him. But we can't expect doctors (and barbers) in 1799 to know modern medicine — and people in medical science are still learning. Traditional barber shops have become a rarity. Today, barbers are men and women that often work in multi