AN ODE TO NATURAL SELECTION AND COVID-19 (satire for those lower on the evolutionary scale)

This pandemic should be welcomed as a reoccurring example of nature’s way, by natural selection and the survival of the fittest of reminding us of who we are—soulless, electro-chemically driven animals, coming to our meaningless end and thereby renewing our singular focus on our own survival.

And let’s leave talk about God out of the picture as if the virus, as the superstitious think, is some manifestation of divine judgment. Sure those folks who love God have hope and love for others, and help strangers, but these misguided sentiments demonstrate they are not true believers in natural selection by loosing the focus on their own survival. These have not yet heeded the all encompassing, autonomous message that the Covid 19 pandemic proclaims. Still thinking about others, they fail to focus everything on their own survival. The strength and supremacy of the religion of atheistic natural selection and survival of the fittest is conspicuously on display. The government is exercising brute power because it can. One man is subjugating another because he can. Laws are being abrogated because they can. Man’s true animal instinct for survival is all around us. And thanks to evolutionary science, we know that’s the way it is supposed to be. No God to create; no God to restrict man’s animal passions; no morality or immorality; no God to save the weak; no God to save the strong; only the strong survive by way of natural selection. It’s a reality, proven beyond any doubt, unanimously confirmed by the brightest minds in the scientific community. There is no good or bad about oppression, tyranny and deaths brought on by Covid-19; it’s just the way the universe unfolds, a welcome reminder of the evolutionary process to a yet superior species. 

So the next time you wonder why this is happening in America and around the world, just think back to public school education, where a secularist teacher explained how evolution works. Don’t despair, be afraid or be discouraged — all unreasonable and unacceptable sentiments. Just consider yourself part of the great cosmic scheme designed to strengthen the human race by way of amoral natural selection, and if you survive Covid-19, consider yourself a superior member of the that race. It may be, however, that natural selection has determined that humanity has run its course, will naturally come to an end, and something we now consider a lesser life form will take our place in the evolutionary scheme, say, a virus.

So enjoy your front-row seat to the decimation of humanity and in this decimation evolutionary growth and development thanks to Covid-19. If you can’t approve of this yourself due to some psychological flaw, approve of this proven science for the sake of the evolutionary growth of the human race.

Cheers!

William Perkins, 1604, on the Inspiration, Preservation and Canonicity of Holy Scripture as the foundation for Preaching

CHAP III

Of the Word of God

The perfect and equal object of Preaching is the Word of God, (or, the word of God is the whole and only matter, about which preaching is exercised: it is the field in which the Preacher must contain himself). Luke 16:29, They have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them. Matt. 23:2, The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chair, that is, they teach the doctrine of Moses which they do profess. 3. All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do.

The Word of God is the wisdom of God concerning the truth, which is according unto godliness descending from above. James 3:17, But the wisdom, which is from above is first pure, etc. Titus 1:1, Paul a servant of God – according to the acknowledging of the truth, which is according to godliness.

Admirable is the excellency of the Word, which is evident partly by the nature thereof, partly by operation.

The excellency of the nature is either the perfection thereof, or the eternity.

The perfection is either the sufficiency or the purity. The sufficiency is that, whereby the word of God is so complete, that nothing may be either put to it, or taken from it, which appertaineth to the proper end thereof. Psalm 19:7, The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul. Deut. 12:32, Whatsoever I command you, take heed ye do it: thou shalt put nothing thereto, nor take aught therefrom. Rev. 22:18, 19.

The purity thereof is, whereby it remaineth entire in itself, void of deceit and error. Psalm 12:6, The words of the Lord are pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth, fined seven times.

The eternity of the word is that, whereby it abideth inviolable and cannot pass until all, which it commandeth, be fully accomplished, Matt. 5:18.

The excellency of the operation is that, whereby it is endowed with virtue; first to discern the spirit of man, Heb, 4:12, For the word of God is lively, and mighty in operation, and sharper than any two-edged sword, and entereth through even to the dividing asunder of the soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and discerneth the thoughts and intents of the heart. James 4:12, There is one Law-giver, who is able to save and to destroy. Isa. 33:21, The Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our Law-giver, the Lord is our King, he will save us. To bind the conscience is to constrain it either to accuse us or excuse of of sin before God.

The Word is in the holy Scripture.

The Scripture is the word of God written in the language fit for the Church by men immediately called to be Clerks or Secretaries of the holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:21, For prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as there were carried and moved by the holy Ghost.

It is called Canonical, because it is as it were the Canon, that is to say, a Rule or Line, of the Master workman, by the help whereof the truth is both first and to be found out, and also afterwards to be examined. Gal. 6:16, And as many as walk according to this Canon or Rule. Therefore, the supreme and absolute determination and judgment of the controversies of the Church ought to be given unto it.

William Perkins, The Art of Prophesying: A Treatise Concerning the Sacred and Only True Manner and Method of Preaching (Imprinted at London by Felix Kyngston for E.E. and are to be sold in Pauls Church-yard at the sign of the Swan, 1607), 4-7.

William Perkins, 1652, on Scripture, the Holy Spirit and Preaching

This catechism, written by Perkins, has parallel columns printed in English and Irish, the translation made by Godfrey Daniel. This section, though brief, shows the 17th C. Reformers commitment to the current translation of the Scripture in English, the King James Bible, and the connection made between God’s written Word and the Word of God preached. As expected in pre-critical scholarship, the Holy Spirit confirms the authenticity of the Scripture to the believer.

Q. Where is the Word of God to be found?

A. The whole Word of God, needful to salvation, is set down in the holy Scriptures.

Q. How know you that the Scriptures are the Word of God, and not men’s policies?

A. I am assured of it: because the holy Ghost persuadeth the conscience that it is so. Secondly, I see it by experience: for the preaching of the Scriptures have the power of God in them to humble a man, when they are preached, and cast him down to hell, and afterward to restore and raise him up again.

Q. What is the use of the Word of God preached?

A. First, it breedeth and then increaseth faith in them which are chosen to salvation: but unto them that perish, it is by reason of their corruption, an occasion of their further damnation.

Q. How must we hear Gods Word that it may be effectual to our salvation?

A. We must come unto it with hunger-bitten hearts, having an appetite to the Word, we must mark it with attention, receive it by faith, submit ourselves unto it with fear and trembling, even then when our faults are reproved: lastly, we must hide it in the corners of our hearts, that we may frame our lives and conversation by it.

William Perkins, The Christian Doctrine or the Foundation of Christian Religion, gathered into six principles necessary for every ignorant man to learn. Translated into Irish by Godfrey Daniel (Printed at Dublin by Will Bladen, 1652), 69-70.

C.G. Lamothe, 1694, on Honoring and Reverencing Holy Scripture

The fourth proof drawn from the honor which the Ancients paid to the Sacred Books of the New Testament.

We may have a very strong argument to prove that the Primitive Church believed that the sacred books of the New Testament were inspired, from the honor and reverence which were paid to them. I shall begin with the holy awe which kept the Ancients from attempting any alterations in the Sacred Writings. It was a piece of rashness and sacrilege to adulterate them either by adding or diminishing. They were laden with Anathemas who were so bold as to lay their mending hands upon those sacred writings. He-ref.I.5.c.30.

We find in the Ecclesiastical History that the heretics who denied the Divinity of our Lord, had the confidence to falsify the Scripture, to accommodate the Text to their opinions. Upon which the author of the primitive ages says, that it was not likely that the heretics were ignorant how criminal an enterprise of the nature was: For, says he, either they believed not that the Sacred Scriptures were dictated by the Holy Ghost; and so were infidels; or they imagine themselves to be wiser than the Holy Ghost, and then what are they other than demoniacs. Euseb. h.e.1.5.c.ult.

They had an inviolable veneration for the Sacred Scripture. Tatianus, for having only presumed to put the Epistles of St. Paul into more elegant language, incurred the censure, which may be seen in the historian last cited. Euseb. 1.4.29. If the Church were so jealous of the words of the Scripture, we may easily judge of the indignation of the Christians when they saw that any body durst presume to violate the Text itself, either by addition or diminution.

Tis clear, that the Christians would never have been so sensible of injury done to the Scripture, if they had not believed it to be the work of the Holy Spirit. Some small fragment of piety affixed to human works would never have been a crime of sacrilege. For example, I see not what great harm it could be, to sow to St. Paul’s Epistle to Philemon, some little discourse upon that indulgence, which is due from Christian masters to their servants, were it true, that the Epistle to Philemon is a piece, wherein the Holy Spirit had no share. Tis true, there may be some things said, in dislike of such an act, in regard that sincerity requires, that other men’s works should be let alone in their natural dress. Nevertheless, the miscarriage deserves not to be treated with the penalties of sacrilege; there is no reason to make such a noise about it, as the primitive Christians did upon the alternations that were made to the writings of the New Testament.

Nothing more clearly shews the opinion which the Ancients had of the inspiration of the Sacred Books, that the honor which they paid them in looking upon them as sovereign decrees in matters of religion. For which reason it was, that in several Councils they were placed upon a throne, as they would have seated Jesus Christ himself had come visibly to preside in those holy assemblies. There was the same honor paid to his Word, as they would have done to his person. Which clearly shows with what eye of veneration they looked upon the Sacred Writings of the New Testament.

This honor also no less visibly appears in the use of the appears in the use which the Ancients made the Scripture to confirm the Faith of the Christians. The Doctors of the Primitive Church allow a sovereign rank to the New Testament. There is no longer any hesitation, after the voice of these Oracles has once been heard. These are the Urims and the Thummins of the New Covenant; after they once had their decision, it was a crime to appeal.

When we seriously consider, that this is a submission and compliance in religion itself, we ought to acknowledge, that this honor was not paid to the Sacred Books, but because they were thought to be the Books of God, who is the only Lord of the conscience. And the Truth of this Revelation will be agreed to, whenever it shall be called to mind, that we speak of a time when the Christians perfectly understood this privilege of the Almighty. They were very nice in this particular. Wherefore did they not obey those Emperors who opposed the course of Christianity? It was the Lord spoken. Wherefore did they not believe so many philosophers whose example and illusions so strongly supported paganism. It was the Lord that said it. Wherefore did they forsake the synagogue, that synagogue which divine mercy had appointed to be the Guardian of the ancient Oracles? It was the Lord had spoken. The Scripture of the New Testament was more powerful than the Emperors and triumphed over the reputation which the great Doctors had enjoyed so long in all the schools of the world. The reason is, because that in comparison of God, man is nothing. When God speaks, nobody else is heard. Therefore the Christians being convinced that the Almighty spoke in the Writings of the New Testament, they yielded with an awful submission to the decisions which they found therein.

This was never contradicted by heretics; they durst not appeal from the words of the Apostle, because they were persuaded that they were the Words of the Holy Spirit. The method which they usually made the use of to avoid the weight of that Authority was to mutilate the Scriptures, or to corrupt the sense by wrested explanations. But when it could be proved, that such a writing was Apostolical, or that such a sense was the meaning of the Apostle, the most obstinate heretics would submit, at least they had nothing to say. It is needless to cite authors upon a subject for which proofs may be found almost in every page of the writings of the Primitive Church. Moreover, there have been so many occasions to show, that she was always looked upon the Scripture as the Rule of Faith, that these proofs are become common. There needs no more for a man to do, but cast his eye upon our Books of Controversy, to see what have been the opinions of the Fathers upon this subject.

C.G. Lamothe, The Inspiration of the New Testament Asserted and Explained in Answer to some Modern Writers (London, Printed for Thomas Bennet, at the Half-Moon in s. Paul’s Church-yard, 1694), 31-35.

C.G. Lamothe, 1694, on Inspiration Establishing Canonicity

(Lamothe shows that personal utility or ecclesiastical usage was not grounds for Canonicity in the Early Church. The Contemporary Church would do well to follow the truth contained in Lamothe’s writings when approaching the current textual and version debate.)

The third proof drawn from the distinction on which the Ancients made between Canonical and Apocryphal books.

This distinction takes place in respect of both Testaments. There are joined to the Canonical books of the Old Testament sever pieces purely human, as the books of Tobis, Judith, Baruc, Maccabees, etc., which are called Apocrypha. A word, of which the true original is very uncertain. But whether it significance is concealed or obscure, or whether it have any other sense, certain it is that those books which are added to the Scripture, though they are not of divine authority, are called Apocrypha.

If the books which are added to the Old Testament are not admitted to be Canonical, tis not because they are defective in their matter. There are some of them whose doctrine is found, and their instruction is pure, so that there has been no scruple made to read them publicly in the Church. I dare presume to say there is a portion of the Apocryphal books which is more instructive and more edifying, than such a portion of books we call Canonical. Wherefore then are they rejected as Apocryphal? I know very well that several marks of human frailty are to be discovered in them; but the chief ground of their being rejected is , because they are books which the Holy Ghost has not inspired, the Finger of God appears not in them; the good things where are there to be found, flow not immediately from the Spring. Moreover, we have reason to examine the suspect them, because they are not recommended to us by persons actuated by the infallible Spirit of God.

This reason is expressed by the Ancients in other terms, for they say, that the Apocryphal books added to the Old Testament want Canonical Authority, because they were written by persons who were no prophets, and who lived after Malachi, the last of the prophets. Wherein they followed Josephus who has derived from thence the grand character of the difference which we ought to make between the Canonical Books and the Apocryphal. The words of the author are so remarkable as not to be omitted. There is nothing more certain, than the writings authorized among us; because they cannot be subject to any contradiction; in regard that there is nothing approved but what the Prophets wrote some ages ago; according to the purity of the truth, by the inspiration and agitation of the Spirit of God.

They have also written all that passed from the time of Artaxerxes to our time. But by reason there has not been, as formerly, a successive series of Prophets, there is not the same credit given to the books which I have mentioned. (Answer to Appion. I.1.c.2.) The books after the Prophet Malachi have been constantly rejected, in regard he was the last writer whom the Holy Spirit inspired, under the Old Testament. (Euseb. 1.8. De monst. Evangel. Quod ab illoi tempore servatoris nullum extet Sacrum Volumen.)

What I have said in respect of the Old Testament, takes place in relation to the New. Several books of piety were composed by the Primitive Church; the authors were persons of worth, and the books were so useful, that the reading of them was not only recommended to private persons, but they made no scruple to read them in public. For example, the Epistle of saint Clement had the same honor. Wherefore was it that those books were not put into the number of the Canonical; that is to say, of those books that are the constant rule of faith and manners? It was not always because they were in some things erroneous, but by reason they were not inspired by the Holy Ghost; that was sufficient to hinder them from being received as Canonical. The question that was put, when there was a dispute about any book of which they doubted, was to know, whether or no it was written by a person inspired. Thence it came to pass that in the history of Eusebius we find that Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria, pronouncing his Sentence upon the Apocalypse said, that he acknowledged it to be the work of some holy man, inspired by the Spirit of God, Tis known also that Origen speaking of the book written by Hermas said, That he believed it to be a writing divinely inspired; a certain proof that they believed those books which the Church has admitted as Canonical, were inspired by the Holy Ghost. (Reor enim sanctis cujusdam…divina spiritu afflati viri id opus esse. Euseb. h.e I.7.c.21. Quae Scriptura valde mihi utilis videtur, Et ut puto, divitus inspirata. Origen. I.10 reptam Epist. Ad Rom. C. 16. Com. 14. 28-31

C.G. Lamothe, The Inspiration of the New Testament Asserted and Explained in Answer to some Modern Writers (London, Printed for Thomas Bennet, at the Half-Moon in St. Paul’s Church-yard, 1694), 28-31.

C. G. Lamothe, 1695, on The Holy Scriptures Inspired

The first proof of the Inspiration of the Sacred Books of the New Testament, drawn from the manner after which the Ancients speak of it.

Tis known how the Christians speak at this day of the Holy Scripture of the New Testament. According to their style tis called The Scripture, by way of Excellency; the Sacred Oracles, the Word of God; when the preacher takes his Text, he says, as it is written in the word of God; and the people for that reason believe themselves obliged to hearken with a devout attention.

This language no way agrees with M.N’s system, who looks upon the Sacred Books as a work purely Human, and wherein there are faults which he would not pardon Livy, or any other prophane historian. Were I of this author’s opinion, I should be dreadfully troubled to hear the Christians speak as they do of the Holy Scripture; I should cry out blasphemy; I should never endure that they say of the voice of mortal man, tis the Voice of God and not man.

Tis to be suspected that M.N. says of himself, that it is one of those pieces of superstition which are so rooted in the minds of people, that it is not safe to decry them. But let him think what pleases him, the language of the Christian is the same at this day, as it has been all along; in the particular there has been no variation. In the purest ages they express themselves in reference to the Scripture as we do now. I defy the most zealous disciples of N.M. to deny it. They cannot do it without speaking against their consciences; or without showing that they are all together strangers to Antiquity.

To fortify this proof which I draw from the appellations that the Ancients gave the Scripture, I think myself bound to make two observations. The first is, that the language cannot proceed from any superstitious aggravation. It was in use in the very first times when Christians spoke according to the simplicity of their hearts, and when they had no leisure to corrupt the Truth by rhetoric or superstition. In the same Age of Innocence, they called the writings of the New Testament the Oracles of Heaven, the Word of God, the Holy Scripture. Nor can this language be accused to have sprung up from the corruption of after ages, when superstition extended her empire. I love to speak, as they spoke at a time when the Church was a virgin, if I may be allowed to make use of the words of an ancient author.

My second observation is this, that the Ancients, when they expressed themselves, honored the New Testament, as the New Testament had honored the ancient. I explain myself thus. When the Old Testament is cited by the Apostles, they usually call it the Scripture by way of excellency; as when St. Paul, speaking of an Oracle dictated by the mouth of God Himself, says, For what saith the Scripture, cast out the bondwoman and her son (Gal. 1:30) And in another place, And the Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed (Gal. 3:8). I made choice of these two passages on purpose, wherein St. Paul cites certain oracles, that M.N. would not himself deny, but that it was God who spake them. The Apostle calls them Scripture. As he phrases it, The Scripture saith this, or God spoke this, comes all to one sense. This is so true, that having said to the Romans, That God had concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all (Rom. 11:32). He speaks the same thing to the Galatians in these words, But the Scripture has concluded all under sin, etc. (Gal. 3:22) By which it appears that the Voice of God, and the Scripture signify the same thing. Thus, when I argue upon the whole, the Apostles when they cite the Oracles of the Old Testament, comprehended them all under the name of Scripture, as if they would have said, the Scripture of God. Now I find that immediately after the Apostles, the saints also quoted the writings of the Apostles under the name Scripture. They have paid the same honor to the writings of the writings of the Apostles, as the Apostles did to the Old Testament. Have I not reason them to conclude from thence, that it was the judgment of the saints of the Primitive Church, that the writings of the Apostles were no less the Scripture of God, than the Prophetic Writings wherein are recorded the Oracles of God?

C.G. Lamothe, The Inspiration of the New Testament Asserted and Explained in Answer to some Modern Writers (London, Printed for Thomas Bennet, at the Half-Moon in ST. Paul’s Church-yard, 1694), 21-24.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started