In Defense of Men and Women, Body and Soul
The BBC News published a male-bashing article by Baroness Susan Greenfield, Director of The Royal Institution, on March 29. It must have created a stir, because the next day, Prof. Steve Jones of University College, London, tried to restore the male ego. This was apparently a two-part documentary exploring what would happen “If women ruled the world.”
Greenfield had alleged that women will outperform men in 20 years, no longer have need of male muscle power, and have lots of alternative methods for bearing and raising children. Her dismissal of men was just slightly less than total: “More probably, it is not so much that men could be extinct, as opposed to our family lives changing dramatically,” she said. They might be useful to keep around as historical curiosities.
Jones responded with an article illustrated with a superman cartoon. The caption read, “Superhero or zero? Professor Jones says men are indispensable.” His point, however, reeks of Darwinian kryptonite and seems unlikely to make his buddies feel able to leap tall buildings in a single bound:
In fact the question of males raises not one, but many biological issues: the origin of sex, of distinct sexes, of why there are only two sexes rather than dozens.
And how is that pastime maintained, given that it is so expensive? A woman, it seems, could much increase the rate at which she copies her own genes if she avoided having them diluted by those of a man.
Yes, men are a complicated lot, and there’s a lot we do not know. As we look through the living world, one thing is clear: it is very hard to get rid of them.
The best justification Jones seems to come up with for being male is that men enable the human race to shuffle the genetic cards. Organisms without both sexes seem to come to an evolutionary dead end, he claims. So since women can’t get rid of the louts, they might as well tolerate them.
If you can keep your head while all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you …
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And – which is more – you’ll be a Man my son.
— Rudyard Kipling
These BBC articles would make Dr. Dobson hopping mad. And they should make any red-blooded man or woman upset. This is really ugly. It illustrates the utter devastation Darwinian thinking has foisted on our culture. Greenfield’s comments disparage the Royal Institution, which was brought to its pinnacle of prestige by an unselfish, honorable, God-fearing, hard-working man: Michael Faraday.
Male chauvinism is wrong, but so is female chauvinism – what’s bad for the gander is bad for the goose. Neither of these articles has restored any dignity to men or women. Darwinism has reduced males and females to gene-propagating commodities. Carl Sagan expressed the Darwinian view of humanity in black ink:
In a very real sense human beings are machines constructed by the nucleic acids to arrange for the efficient replication of more nucleic acids. In a sense our strongest urges, noblest enterprises, most compelling necessities, and apparent free wills are all an expression of the information coded in the genetic material: We are, in a way, temporary ambulatory repositories for our nucleic acids. This does not deny our humanity. It does not prevent us from pursuing the good, the true, and the beautiful. But it would be a great mistake to ignore where we have come from in our attempt to determine where we are going.
The Cosmic Connection (Dell 1960), p. 6.
Talk about schizophrenia; he just denied our humanity and then said it does not deny our humanity. He used his free will to deny that we have free will. He left “the good, the true, and the beautiful” as undefined terms, and reduced our noblest enterprises to the action of selfish genes. This is the legacy of Darwinism, of which Sagan was one of the staunchest evangelists. It leaves humanity as nothing more than gene-replicating machines accidentally emerging from nothingness and headed nowhere. How can machines “attempt to determine where we are going”? Want to know where we are going if Darwinism is true? To the grave, where consciousness and intelligence and noble enterprises are extinguished, returning to the nothingness from which they emerged.
Had enough? Good. Forget Sagan’s cynical and depressing view, because he contradicted himself. The only way he could make his point was to cheat: he borrowed words from a Christian vocabulary (good, true, beautiful, noble, information, free will, etc.). Thus, he shot his straw man in the foot. If he really believed what he was saying, he would cry “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity” in despair. He would realize that his own noble enterprises, whether writing books, exploring Mars or appearing on the Johnny Carson show, were all emptiness and striving after wind. He would just have sex (to help out the selfish genes) and then die. And forget the BBC’s rant against maleness, which would have even robbed him of the joy of sex. Forget, too, Jones’ wimpy comeback. All these ideas are worthless, built on a foundation of Darwinian shifting sand. Darwinians cannot answer any of the questions they raised: the origin of sex, of distinct sexes, of why there are only two sexes rather than dozens, and why sex persists when it is so expensive (see 04/14/2003 headline, for example). Sex and gender roles are incomprehensible to a Darwinian, because they have no solid foundation for ultimate meaning.
Here’s the first step for restoring your worth as a real man, or a real woman: keep your head, like Kipling warned. Don’t fall for Darwinian propaganda. It’s contradictory, unsupported by evidence, and leads to despair. You have a soul, brother; you have a soul, sister; and being a man or woman is all about soul. Souls did not evolve.
To the degree Darwinism degrades humanity, the Bible restores it, and then some! God Himself took our physical bodies He had formed by His intelligent design, and breathed into them the breath of life, and we became living souls. Human beings, both male and female, were inscribed with the image of God, unlike anything else He had made. Your purpose is not just to pass on your genes and die. You have worth as an individual. You are responsible as an individual for what you do with your life. You, as an individual, will face the judgment of your Maker.
Physically, God made men and women to need and desire one another. All higher animals propagate by sexual reproduction, but with humankind, God instituted the family as a means of passing on His commandments to future generations, and gave sexual reproduction a spiritual and emotional meaning beyond mere procreation, as a picture of love – something animals, without God’s image, cannot experience. He assigned roles to men and women appropriate to our natures. But spiritually, He made us much more than mere sexual dimorphisms of an animal species. Because of His image we bear, we have minds, and language, and the possibility of meaningful relationships. We can think, reason, speak, write, communicate, and love. His two great commandments are for men and women: to love God with all our heart, soul, strength and mind, and to love our neighbor as ourselves.
As His creations made in His image, we are going to live forever. Eternity will be either with or without our Creator, depending on our response to His call. By default it will be without Him, because we have all sinned. But because the Lord loved us, He offered His Son as a sacrifice to redeem us from our sins. This is the good news of the Word of God to us: He offers us reconciliation, without penalty, as a gift. You can receive this gift by turning from your sin and placing your trust, your empty hands of faith, into his strong hand of salvation. That can be the start of a new life, a new relationship with your Maker.
Just how great His love to us was only hinted at in the recent blockbuster movie The Passion of the Christ. The movie quoted Jesus’ proverb and promise from John 15, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.” The remembrance of that passion of Christ, and the subsequent glorious resurrection, is approaching. The contrast between the two world views – the dismal, meaningless, gene-propagating Darwinian world expressed by Sagan and the BBC articles, and the rich relationship between men, women and a heavenly Father taught in the Word of God – could hardly be more stark. One leads to death, one to life. So choose life: won’t you repent of your sin, and receive Him today? Then you can find fulfillment and abundant life as a man or woman of God.
Homework: Watch The Passion of the Christ, then come home and read how it was prophesied 700 years before it happened by Isaiah (read Isaiah 52-54, esp. ch. 53). Then read Jesus’ explanation of why He came and the importance of being born again by believing (trusting) in Him, in John ch. 3. To take your belief to the point of commitment, read the Apostle Paul’s instructions in Romans 10. Then for a real encouragement, and in preparation for Easter, read what is in store for those who trust in Christ by reading I Corinthians 15, the great “resurrection” chapter of the Bible. When you get to the last verse, you will see why pursuing the good, the true, and the beautiful, is indeed a noble enterprise for the redeemed: whether man or woman, boy or girl.
If you have any questions understanding these things, write here.