When all varieties of plants begin to shoot up out of the
soil in the early spring it is hard to determine which type of plant is which. At the early stages of growth many plants are
indistinguishable from one another… at least to the average person. While there are some who are trained in
botany, or earn their living by producing crops, who can tell early on what a
plant is, the majority of us have to wait a while before we know for sure. While we can speculate and sometimes even
guess the identity of a species, it usually takes a certain event for us to
know for sure what the plant is.
In the spiritual world Jesus referred to this event as the
litmus test for identifying whether a developing theory is true or false. He said (concerning men and their teachings)
“ye shall know them by the fruit they bear.”
Returning to the plant kingdom for a moment… it is easy to tell what a
plant is when the fruit is on the branch (vine or whatever). If you pick a peach from a tree, you will know
the tree is without a doubt a peach tree!
Fruit is a declaration of true identity.
The fruit of a plant generally is on the plant in the later part of the
growing season. The Lord alluded to this
when he told the disciples not to take the tares out of the field until harvest
time… the reason was that they could not positively identify the plants until
the time of harvesting the grain (fruit) from the wheat plant. Again, the fruit declares the plant’s
identity.
False teaching is by design often supported by very
compelling logic. However, if the
teaching is considered long enough for its fruit to be manifest identification
becomes, not only easy, but absolute!
For those teachings that have been with us long enough to come to
fruition there is no need to struggle with their veracity. Just look at what kind of fruit they have
brought forth!
In the second half of the 19th century a theory
was brought forth from a man named Charles Darwin and it has been called
“evolution”. Much debate has occurred and
the controversy even entered a courtroom during the “Scopes Monkey Trial” in
1926. Fortunately, we have been able to
see the fruit of the concept in the years since. I write “fortunately” for the sake of
identification, not for the horrendous results that we must consider… the fruit
of that teaching.
In 1912 an article was written applauding the relatively new
theory. It was written by Anton
Pannekoek. From the view of the writer
the “plant” looked to be legitimately valid… yet it was still in a stage of
development (and acceptance). It was too
soon to see the fruit that would come forth.
Within a few years from his writing, fruit would begin to emerge…
however not totally recognized. The
article was praising the relative new idea of the “survival of the fittest”. In support of Darwin’s theory Pannekoek
wrote, “The scientific importance of
Marxism as well as of Darwinism consists in their following out the theory of
evolution…” He then began to extol
the virtues of evolution by expounding on the logic of the idea of the
strongest individuals of a species surviving in the competition for limited
food supplies, thus producing a continuing better and stronger breed or
specie. He quotes Mr. Darwin himself in
explanation.
“In October, 1838,
that is, fifteen months after I had begun my systematic inquiry, I happened to
read for amusement Malthus on population, and being well prepared to appreciate
the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long continuous
observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that
under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved and
unfavorable ones to be destroyed. The
result of this would be the formation of new species. Here, then, I had at last got a theory by
which to work.”
Again, much debate has centered around this concept and the
majority of attempts to prove or disprove the theory has been in the realm of
evidences that support either the validation of, or the repudiation of the idea
of evolution. But using the illustration
of the plant’s identification (something Jesus taught us to do in His method of
conceptual teaching… i.e. parables), it becomes a matter of simply observing
the fruit of the idea rather than trying to figure the truth of the matter by
examining the concept as it is in the developmental stages. Simply, it would be like trying to figure the
identity of a plant by its leaf structure, height, branches, etc. while the
fruit of the plant was hanging over head! Just look at the fruit… you will identify the
plant!
So what is the fruit of the theory of evolution?
Simply, and ironically, the fruit of the “survival of the
fittest” is death! The season of
fruitfulness of this so-called scientific conclusion can be seen in
history. The period of time was to begin
shortly after Pannekoek wrote his article in praise of evolution’s supposed superior
intellectual position in comparison to the older and more primitive concept of
creative design. The fruit of Marxism’s
ideology was about to show itself on the branches of the tree. It was to come, as Pannekoek wrote in explanation
of economist Malthus influence on Darwin’s concepts, in the form of societal
evolution:
“There is not
enough food for all; people must therefore struggle with each other for their
existence, and many must go down in this
struggle. By this theory capitalist competition as well as the misery
existing were declared as an unavoidable natural law.”
We see the seeds of not only Darwinism being planted here,
but of Marxism as well! Indeed Evolution
and Communism are not so “strange bedfellows”.
The ideology of Evolution is the promoter of Communism; and Communism
(Marxism) is dependent on Evolution (Darwinism). Both of these see the need for elimination of
competition as a natural and even needed aspect of their ideology.
Indeed “many must go down” became the justifier of a
horrific season of fruit production beginning in the “teens” of the 20th
century and lasting through the middle of the same. The “greater good” concept begins to infect
human reasoning with murderous results to follow. Notice the similar thinking in regard to the
organic world:
“… Darwin turned to another line of
experience. The animal breeder and the gardener are able to raise artificially
new races and varieties. When a gardener wants to raise from a certain plant a
variety having large blossoms, all he
has to do is to kill before
maturity all those plants having small blossoms…”
“If
we should ask an animal-breeder to raise a long-necked animal from a short-necked
one, it would not appear to him an impossibility. All he would have to do would be to choose those having partly
longer necks, have them inter-bred, kill
the young ones having narrow necks”
As the Bolsheviks
were rebelling in Russia at the end of WWI to set up a Marxist state, the
influence of Darwinism was being planted in the mind of one Adolf Hitler as he
began to adopt the ideology of a “master race” of superior humans… namely blond
haired, blue eyed Germans. In his
writing, Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust, Jerry Bergman wrote, “Hitler
believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding
similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formation of their racial policies,
Hitler’s government relied heavily upon Darwinism…”
“All you would have to do is kill!” Indeed, the fruit was forming on the vine of
Evolution’s theory! By the time Hitler
had finished his promotion of the master race over 50 million people would lie
dead… the horrible consequence of an unproved theory accepted and promoted as
fact by a mad man. Of course, the most
atrocious of the killing was in the attempted genocide of the Jewish people who
were considered the “weak” of a society needing desperately to “evolve” to a higher level… at least in
the mind of the mentally mad!
In the meantime,
and for a longer duration another 50 million would die as societal evolution
was taking place under Darwinian justification in the mind of one Joseph
Stalin. Communism was living by the
simple “survival of the fittest” idea that “all you have to do is kill”.
These are the
ultimate results of an educational system teaching that which is false. While the debate may continue for years over
the veracity of the theory of evolution, the fruit of the idea has long been
seen on the branches of not so ancient history and it is a simple conclusion
that must be drawn. The fruit of this
idea is evil in the grandest of forms!
