Basic HTML Version
48
of the acceleration of inventions was
stimulated first by the printing press,
which made possible a greater diffusion
of knowledge and exchange of ideas,
and then by more capid means of trans–
poctation -
the steam engine, the
steamboat, the automobile, the airplane.
And finally, the telephone, telegraph,
radio, TV.
But what was the original impetus?
Science to Solve Man's
Problems ?
With the emergence of "modero
science," around the beginning of the
19th century, scientists assured the
world that man had progressed to
the
point where he then could dispense
with the superstitious crutch of religion
and belief in God. Now humanity
cou1d rely on the
new
messiah -
Modero
Science.
"Given sufficient knowledge," said
the scientists, "we shall solve all of
humanity's problems, and cure all the
world's ills."
To replace religion and belief in
God, scientists and educators had sub–
stituted the doctrine of evolution. The
tools Modero Science used in the pro–
duction of this new KNOWLEDGE were a
stepped-up use of those man had
em–
ployed since the dawn of history -
rejection of revelatioo as a source of
knowledge, and the use of observation,
experimentation, and human reason.
So the production of KNOWLilDGE
increased at a constantly accelerating
pace. The world's total fund of knowl–
edge virtually
doubled
in the one dccade
of the 1960's!
But, parodoxically, as knowledge has
increased,
so have hmnanity's
problems,
troubles and evils, at almost an equal
rate of acceleration!
What's wrong with the díctum that
knowledge ís the sote
need
for solu–
tions? We are face to face with the
stern FACT that increasing evi ls have
escalated alongside increasing knowl–
edge! That is not to say that the in–
creased knowledge
caused
the growing
evils.
It
does mean that the knowledge
produced
did not cure
existing evils,
or prevent netu evils!
The ANSWER becomes plain. There
was
somethi11g wrong
with the knowl–
edge being produced, or else the needed
The
PLAIN TRUTH
MJSSJNG DIMENSION in knowJedge was
not being discovered.
To the dictum of science that given
sufficient knowledge, mankind's prob–
lems would
be
solved, and human–
ity's ills cured,
1
add this: Solutions
come
from the
1·ight
knowledge, that
supplies the
right
answer - the true
CAUSE of both the evils, and the
CAUSE that would produce peace and
joy and every GOOD result ; and,
secondly, the application of that knowl–
edge. For 1 have always said that
koowledge is of value only
to
the extent
that it is
medl
The Academic Freedom to
Reject Basic Knowledge!
In this feverish development of
knowledge production, scholars in uni–
verslhes have been placing great
emphasis on
academic freedom.
Aca–
demic freedom is defined as the in–
dependeot judgment allowed teachers,
scholars, scientists, students, in
the
pur–
suit of koowledge.
Science as a whole, and higher educa–
tion, have exercised the academic free–
dom to postulate a creation without a
Creator. They have engaged in the
activity of knowledge production with
total rejection of any possibility of the
miracu1ous, the supernatural, the exis–
tence of God -
oc
anything outside the
realm of the material. They have re–
jected utterly revelation as a source of
basic knowledge!
When I engaged in research on the
theory of evolution,
1
studied Darwin,
Haeckel, Huxley, Vogt, Chamberlain
and other exponents of the theory. But
also 1 looked at the other side of the
questioo. But I would venture to say
that most of those whose higher edu–
cation has been acquired during the past
half century have been taught aod have
accepted without question the evolu–
tionary theory,
110t having examined
tuith any .rerioiiJness
the Biblicai evi–
deoces of special creation. The wocld's
"Best Seller" has been dismissed
witho111
a hearing.
Is it oot human to err ?
Could it be
possible
foc
the most
highly educated minds to have been
intellectually misled or deceived? Could
they, viewing only
one side
of the
questíon, be infallible, entirely above
making mistakes?
March-April 1972
For many years oow, I have observed
that errors almost always
come
from a
false basic premise, carelessly
asmmed
as self-evident, and taken for granted
without question, then building on that
false basic hypothesis. The basic premise
for knowledge production in our time
has been the evolutionary concept.
It
has been the eye-glasses through which
all questions have been viewed. Yet it
remains unproved, and by its very
nature it is a theory not subject to proof.
lt
is a FAJTH. And to question it is -
to those who embrace this faith
academic heresy!
Do we, then, DARE question the
theories so generally accepted by ad–
vanced scholarship? Is it heretical
to
question their assumed conclusions and
ask for PROOF? ls it academic heresy
to look at the
other
si
de
of the coin?
Suppose, now, we appropriate the
academic freedom
to carefully
examine
that which has been dismissed
witho111
examination.
It might prove enlightening at this
point - and even exciting - to allow
ourselves the latitude of
academic free–
dom
unprejudicially
to
examine the
Bíblica! claims for ORIGJNS - for the
presence of the earth, and of mankind.
Ever since I first read H. G. Wells'
011tline of History,
years ago, I had an
urge to write a parallel "Outline of
History" ( not under that title, of
course) presenting the OTHER SJDE of
this two-sided question of origins.
Could it be possible that we might
find there the EXPLANATJ.ON of why
MAN is as
he
is - WHY he has all these
problems - WHY the wocld is filled
with evils? Could it be possible we
might find, there, the
CAUSE
of all
human suffering, anguish, unhappiness,
and inequality? Could
it
be
possible
we might find, there, the CAUSE that
would produce peace, happiness, abun–
dant well-being? The CAUSE which
world leaders have apparently over–
looked?
The
time
has come when
J
cannot de–
lay longer. This present series of acti–
cles, of which this is the first
installment,
is
that parallel "Outline"
I have so long had the urge to write.
It will continue with the next
number of
The
PLAIN TRUTH. O