Small Potatoes and Few

Excerpts from the late D. James Kennedy’s “Today’s Conflict, Tomorrow’s Crisis” (this is NOT a blanket-endorsement of the late D. James Kennedy or any “ministries” he was associated with. This post is “of historical interest” (which is a common theme on this blog).

“Schoenberg said that man is merely ‘a hairless ape.’ DuMaurier said we are ‘a fungus on the surface of one of the minor planets.’ Nietzsche said humanity is ‘a rope stretched over an abyss.’ Rudyard Kipling said mankind is ‘small potatoes and few.’ W.D. Thornbury claimed human existence is ‘a jest, a dream, a show, bubble, air,’ while F.P. Church said that even the most noble individual is ‘a mere insect, an ant.’ H. L. Mencken said, ‘To sum up: 1. The cosmos is a gigantic fly-wheel making 10,000 revolutions a minute. 2. Man is a sick fly taking a dizzy ride on it. 3. Religion is the theory that the wheel was designed and set spinning to give him the ride.’ The English poet Lord Byron said, ‘Why I came here, I know not; where I shall go it is useless to inquire — in the midst of myriads of the living and the dead worlds, stars, systems, infinity, why should I be anxious about an atom?’


“Dr. Paul Branshard, a leading humanist, evolutionist, and a vigorous critic of religious education, has said: ‘I think the most important factor leading us to a secular society has been the educational factor. Our schools may not teach Johnny to read properly, but the fact that Johnny is in school until he is 16 tends to lead toward the elimination of religious superstition. The average child now acquires a high school education, and this militates against Adam and Eve and all other myths of alleged history.’

Excerpts from D. James’ “Solving Bible Mysteries”:

“Some Christians have attempted to merge the Bible and evolution into a unified worldview. Surveys show that as much as 40 percent of Americans believe that the Bible and evolution are true. Unfortunately, these well-intentioned but misguided people fail to recognize the absolute incompatibility between the Bible and evolution…Sir Julian Huxley, the leading evolutionist in the world until his death in 1975, once said, ‘It is clear that the doctrine of evolution is directly antagonistic to that of Creation…Evolution, if consistently accepted, makes it impossible to believe the Bible.'”

Kennedy continues:

“Shortly before his death in 1975, Sir Julian Huxley gave a television interview that I happened to watch. Huxley was a widely respected scientist, the first director of UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization)…During the interview, the woman journalist asked Julian Huxley this question: ‘Why have so many scientists been so quick to adopt Darwin’s theory of evolution?’

Huxley’s answer began with these words:

‘The reason we scientists all jumped at The Origin of Species was because –‘

What do you think Huxley said next? And consider this: What would the average Darwin-indoctrinated high school or college student think Huxley said next? …But let’s go back to Julian Huxley’s dangling sentence…He didn’t talk about reason and logic. He didn’t talk about evidence and objectivity. Here is his answer: ‘The reason we scientists all jumped at The Origin of Species was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.’

More from Kennedy’s Solving Bible Mysteries:

“A textbook called General Zoology states, ‘All scientists at the present time agree that evolution is a fact.’ …Again I quote the great British evolutionist, Sir Arthur Keith: ‘Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable’ (Keith, Evolution and Ethics, 230). What an astounding statement by a leading evolutionist! Whether there is evidence or not, the evolutionists cling to their theory because they simply can’t stand the alternative, which is, “In the beginning God…”!

Is this a rational position? Is it scientific? Of course not. It is sheer, blatant, arbitrary prejudice, completely unworthy of those who call themselves men and women of science. And Sir Arthur Keith is not the only evolutionist to make this admission. Listen to some other famous scientists:

Professor Fleischmann, zoologist from the University of Erlangen: ‘The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination.’

The late Sir William Dawson, Canada’s great geologist: ‘[The theory of evolution] is one of the strangest phenomena of humanity; it is utterly destitute of proof.’

Nobel prize-winning physicist Robert A. Millikan: ‘The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution which no scientist can ever prove.’

Dr. Austin H. Clark, author of The New Evolution: Zoogenesis and one of America’s greatest biologists: ‘So far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any of the major groups arose from any other.’

Dr. Richard Goldschmidt — professor of zoology at the University of California and the originator of the ‘hopeful monster’ theory of evolution — spent his entire life searching for evidence to prove evolution was true. In the end, he concluded, ‘Darwin’s theory of natural selection has never had any proof…yet it has been universally accepted.’

Science journalist Roger Lewin, author of Bones of Contention: ‘The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as ‘proof’ for ‘evolution,’ and then ignore all the difficulties. It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions'” (D. James Kennedy, Solving Bible Mysteries).