An honest examination of evolutionary ethics should lead anyone,
whether atheist or Christian, to find this worldview problematic. At first
glance, it may be a simple solution for those who do not believe in an all
knowing, infinite God who cares about true justice.
The biggest and most inevitable problem is that it does not address the
nature of man. For this reason, evolutionary ethics is incompatible with a
belief in God as the foundation for ethics.
Both testaments of the Bible speak of our nature being sinful. The Old
Testament says in Jeremiah 17:9a that “The Heart is deceitful above all
things.” While the New Testament says in 1 John 1:8 “If we say we have
no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”
In his secular article in Psychology Today, Israel W. Charny states that,
“The politically correct psychology of our time generally tells us, or at
least implies, that, if free of abnormality, human beings are humane and
constructive, fun, and safe to be with.”[1] While he continues in his article
to argue this point, he cannot deny that the dark side of human nature is
very real and must be faced.
Throughout history the majority of man has not held a Judeo-Christian
worldview and we have witnessed countless atrocities on every continent
because in the absence of a true relationship with God, man gives into his
nature. Examples such as the Romans, Mongols, Aztecs and Muslims each
prove this point with their barbarism and violence. This is not the result of
mere evolution.
McQuilkin and Copan say that evolutionary ethics allows for the excuse
that “there is no real moral obligation behind those beliefs.”[2] Simply
put, if it benefits a group or the individual it is worth doing, whether
Christian’s would find it moral or not.
McQuilkin and Copan also explain this when they say, “If we are simply
the products of naturalistic evolution and wired for survival, then the
beliefs we hold are produced by nonrational forces beyond our
control.”[3] Laws become meaningless because man can now act on his
need for survival instead of ethics.
Often, I find that explaining this to someone to make them understand is
to put it in the perspective of a parent. J. Warner Wallace says, “If you are
a parent, you also have some empirical evidence from which to draw. You
know you don’t have to teach your infant to be selfish, impatient, rude
and self-serving.”[4] It is morals that we must teach them, not how to be
sinful.
Bibliography:
Charny, Israel W. “The Nature of Man.” Psychology Today, March 27th,
2018. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/warrior-life/201803/the-
nature-man-is-man-nature-good-or-basically-bad (Links to an external
site.).
McQuilkin, J Robertson, and Paul11197808308281802xmlmarcxml
Copan. An Introduction to
Biblical Ethics: Walking in the Way of Wisdom. third ed. Downers Grove, IL:
IVP, an imprint of
InterVarsity Press, 2014.
Wallace, J. Warner. “What Does Christianity Say About the Nature of
Humans?” Cold-Case Christianity, February 24,
2020. https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/what-does-christianity-say-
about-the-nature-of-humans/ (Links to an external site.) .
[1] Israel W. Charny, “The Nature of Man,” Psychology Today, March 27th,
2018, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/warrior-life/201803/the-
nature-man-is-man-nature-good-or-basically-bad (Links to an external
site.).
[2] J Robertson McQuilkin and Paul11197808308281802xmlmarcxml
Copan, An Introduction to Biblical Ethics: Walking in the Way of Wisdom,
third ed. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, an imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2014),
180.
