Could a consistent evolutionist agree with the catechism’s answer to question 1?
No. A consistent evolutionist could not agree that man’s chief and highest end is to glorify and enjoy God, for he must hold that the human race has evolved from a brute ancestry by a process which originated in blind chance. Therefore he must hold that the human race cannot exist for any purpose outside of itself. There are ‘theistic evolutionists’ who believe that evolution was God’s method of creation, but they are not consistent, for creation concerns the origin of things, while evolution starts by assuming that things already exist and seeks to show their development to other forms. The consistent evolutionist cannot believe in creation by the sheer power of God, and therefore he cannot believe that the human race exists not for itself but for God. What is wrong with the following statement: “Man’s chief and highest end is to seek happiness?” This statement makes the purpose of human life something within man himself. This cannot be reconciled with the Scripture teaching that all
Related Questions
- I would agree that my test results show that nitrification is occurring much faster than denitrification, but is the answer really to slow down to forward direction of the reaction?
- One thing that Id like to ask George before I answer that George, did he agree to the counselling and the psychiatric help?
- Is an interval training program the answer to rapid, consistent weight loss?
