Chapter 7 Breaking news. Good and evil are just
survival strategies. That's right, folks. According
to totally scientific evolutionary theory, morality
isn't real. It's just a biological illusion created
by your brain chemistry to help your ancestors
not get eaten. Murder? Not actually wrong, just
not currently beneficial for the species. Stealing?
Bad if you're the victim, but totally fine if
it helps survival. Helping the poor? Just another
genetic mutation to make humans cooperate. According
to evolution, there's no objective right or wrong,
just whatever helps genes pass to the next generation.
Which means, if stealing, lying, and cheating
ever became the best survival tactic, guess what?
They'd be morally good, too. But hold up, why
do atheists still act like some things are truly
wrong? The evolutionary morality paradox. Evolutionists
claim morality evolved purely for survival. Okay,
let's test that theory with a totally scientific
caveman experiment. Caveman A shares his food,
helps the weak, and risks his life to save others.
Caveman B takes all the food, pushes the weak
off a cliff, and only cares about himself. According
to pure Darwinian survival, who should win? Answer.
Caveman B. He gets more resources. He removes
competition. He passes on more selfish genes.
But wait, isn't that evil? If morality was just
about survival, why do humans instinctively see
selfishness as wrong? If morality evolved to
keep humans alive, why do people admire sacrifice,
generosity, and love things that often reduce
personal survival? Maybe, just maybe, morality
isn't about survival at all, but about something
higher. Just believe it, bro. The evolutionary
morality problem. Now, before you ask, has anyone
ever proven morality is just a survival tool?
The answer is no. But don't worry. The experts
have a brilliant response for you. We don't know
how, but it happened. Trust us. If you doubt
it, you just don't understand science. It's a
social construct that helps species cooperate.
Translation. We have no real explanation, but
shut up and believe us anyway. Society decides
morality until you disagree with it. Some atheists
argue morality is just a social contract. Great.
That means society decides what's right and wrong.
But here's the problem. If society decides morality,
was slavery okay when most societies accepted
it? If society defines right and wrong, was Hitler
just following Germany's morals in the 1940s?
If morality is just a survival mechanism, why
do people die for what's right, even when it
doesn't help them survive? Here's the truth.
If morality changes based on social trends, then
morality is meaningless. But wait, atheists still
think some things are always wrong. Why? Because
deep down they know morality is objective, not
a social contract. If morality is just evolution,
why do atheists get mad? Have you ever noticed
that atheists love talking about morality? Religion
is evil. The Bible is outdated. You can be good
without God. Hold up. If good and evil are just
evolutionary illusions, why do atheists argue
about them like they actually mean something?
Atheists say morality is subjective, but argue
as if it's objective. That's like saying, taste
is just personal preference, but pineapple pizza
is wrong. If morality is just brain chemicals,
then no action is objectively good or bad. It's
just neurons firing in someone's head. So why
should we care about their opinions? Example,
why this is impossible. Let's apply evolutionary
morality to real life. Imagine two people debating
whether murder is wrong. Person A, murder is
always wrong. Person B, no, morality is just
brain chemistry. Wait, stop right there. If morality
is just brain chemicals, that means... Murder
isn't truly wrong. It's just another random neuron
firing pattern. You can't actually say anything
is evil because it's just a survival strategy.
Any moral disagreement is meaningless because
it's just one brain fizzing differently than
another. This is what's called a self -refuting
worldview. It destroys itself. If morality is
just survival instinct, then there's no such
thing as justice. No true right or wrong, and
no reason to even have laws. But funny enough,
atheists still call things right and wrong all
the time. The Bible had it right all along. While
atheist scientists keep rewriting morality to
fit their survival theories, the Bible has had
the answer from the start. Romans 2 .15, the
law is written on their hearts. That's why we
all instinctively know right and wrong. Micah
6 .8. Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with
God. Not do whatever helps you survive. Isaiah
5 .20. Woe to those who call evil good and good
evil, like moral relativists. Meanwhile, science
says, Dude, morality is just an illusion, but
let me tell you why you're wrong and I'm right.
Yeah, no thanks. Final thoughts. Who's really
trusting science? Science depends on order, truth,
and logic. Evolution says morality is just an
accident of survival. Atheists argue as if morality
actually matters. But they still say good and
evil don't exist objectively. So tell me again,
who's really trusting science here? If you believe
some things are truly right and truly wrong,
guess what? You just admitted morality isn't
just a survival trick. It's real and objective.
But don't worry, the atheists will be back tomorrow
using absolute moral claims to prove that morality
is just a social construct while cashing their
research grants.