An Evil Triumvirate

photo of jack o lantern covered with dry leaves
Photo by Bartek Wojtas on

Scientism is a religion tasked with preserving belief in evolution.  It is the alter at which the atheist worships.                  Neal Mack MD

If I told you there were three closely interconnected beliefs which are destroying society as we know it, you might be hesitant to believe it.  So let me explain. First the beliefs, and then their interconnections. Each of these three beliefs is dependent on the other.  Each belief naturally interweaves with the other.  Each, if taken to it’s logical extreme, virtually requires the other two. (See last week’s post on Evolution, Scientism, and the Demise of Atheism.)

Atheism. Christians and other theistic religions have no trouble explaining the origin of life or the universe.  An omnipotent God did it.  An atheist views that as a cop out.  He must somehow account for another origin for life. God is out of the equation. Life therefore, and the existence of the atheist himself, must have another explanation.  Enter evolution and the big bang. Pretty much everyone knows the definition of atheism. But most fail to realize that the atheist is completely dependent on belief in evolution. He has no other explanation for his existence. If he does not believe in God then he must believe mankind and the universe created themselves, or came about by virtue of some grand cosmic accident. Atheism is not in itself evil, just foolish.  Atheists are not of necessity evil persons, but atheism lacks the logical cognitive restraints against many of the sins and evil actions traditionally proscribed, forbidden, or banned in religious societies.

Evolutionism. Evolution is a theory (not a fact) developed for the express purpose of explaining life in the absence of a Creator.  Without evolution atheists have no explanation for life. Secular atheism is both the author and the beneficiary of evolutionary teaching. The chicken or the egg argument, in this case, actually works both ways.  The teaching of evolution benefits atheism and the teaching of atheism promotes belief in evolution. The belief that life created itself, is a faith based decision, usually dependent on atheism and on scientism.  Any person, religious or not, could entertain the possibility of evolution as an explanation for our existence. But since there is no scientific proof of events which happened in the distant past, they are accepted on faith.  One either has faith in evolution, or faith in creation. Those who believe “science has all the answers to all the questions” are in effect practicing the religion of scientism.

Scientism, the belief that science is the only source of useful knowledge, is also a faith based philosophy. It is a tenet of atheism that has developed over that last century into a strong influence throughout society that masquerades as science while promoting atheism and evolution. The two major (unproven) tenets of scientism are Evolution and the Big Bang. (See previous posts on Scientism.) Scientism is probably the least understood but likely most important leg of this three legged stool.  Scientism is an unjustified faith in science, as though it has all the answers to all the questions in life. “Scientism is an ideology that promotes science as the purportedly objective means by which society should determine normative and epistemological values.“(2) Although that sounds a little intimidating, it just means people have come to believe that science has all the answers to all the questions. But clearly it does not. (See prior blogs on why Scientism is self refuting.) Lets take the banner belief, the poster child of Scientism, the big bang, as an example.

Eric J. Lerner, president of Lawrenceville Plasma Physics, Inc. argues that the big bang is not even scientific, but absurd, “The big bang is essentially a creationist philosophy. It is creationist both because it opens the door to a supernatural origin of the universe itself, and because it basically says the universe seems absurd. We are asked to believe in it because the experts say it’s true.” (3) Lerner goes on to say, “In my mind the biggest pernicious impact of big bang cosmology, to quote my mentor Alfvén again, is that “it blurs the line between science and science fiction.”

Science?  Or Science fiction? Pretty much everyone is familiar with the Star Trek Series.  It was a staple on television for many years and a dominating motion picture franchise for decades.  In the beginning, which I still recall, it was called science fiction. People understood that Captain Kirk’s escapades with attractive humanoid aliens were imaginary.  But now, ask any college freshman about the likelihood of interstellar travel, parallel universes, and even time travel, and most will tell you it is all just around the corner.  Just one more discovery and we will have it all.  Those beliefs are based in scientism.  At some point people lose the ability to differentiate between reality and imagination. That is also the state of modern cosmology.  It is purely science fiction. Why do I think it is science fiction? I will let Lerner explain.

Lerner goes on to state, “Conventional cosmology today is a very big step back toward that medieval conception. Now big bang cosmology is talking about things like dark energy, dark matter, inflation. These are phenomena that cannot be observed or, in the case of dark matter, it could be but never has been in the laboratory and only exists in the celestial sphere. This makes these hypotheses much more difficult to test.” He continues “In most fields of science, if you have a clear contradiction between observation and experiment, you have to reject the theory. But the history of the big bang theory is that they’ve introduced new hypothetical entities that have no backing evidence except that they preserve the underlying theory. Twenty-five years ago the concept of inflation, which involves a completely unknown field and energy, was introduced to save the big bang from many very grave contradictions of observation. Soon afterward was the addition of nonbaryonic “dark” matter and, in the last 10 years, dark energy.”(3)

In other words  the big bang hypothesis has already failed the test of science.  But you see, Scientism has never been about finding the truth.  Scientism is a religion tasked with preserving belief in evolution.  It is the alter at which the atheist worships. Do not expect to find rationality here. Hence the title of this blog, “An Evil Triumvirate.”  Our beliefs determine our trajectory in society as well as in our individual lives. The cumulative effects of our acceptance of secular atheism, evolution, and scientism have unquestionably had such a negative impact on society as to be reasonably called disastrous. The insidious evil effects of these three beliefs are coming into full view now as we see rampant drug abuse, homelessness, family breakups, HIV, pornography, economic oppression, and even sex slavery.  Why?  Because with atheism, the universe is an accident and life has no meaning. Because without the Holy Spirit there is no limit to the evil men and women can commit.

(For more information please see prior posts; A Totally Modern View on Evolution, AND Evolutionism, Scientism, and the Demise of Atheism, AND Real Science, AND Five Things Everyone Should Know About Scientism.)





Genesis 6:5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.

Published by


Emergency Room Physician. Student of science and student of scripture. Defending truth in a post-truth society. I believe that Truth exists, and I believe it is our duty and privilege to seek it out, amidst ignorance, frivolity, and misconceptions.

14 thoughts on “An Evil Triumvirate”

  1. Okay. I thought this was an interesting point of view until you said:

    “these three beliefs are coming into full view now as we see rampant drug abuse, homelessness, family breakups, HIV, pornography, economic oppression, and even sex slavery.”

    My friend, atheism, evolution and “scientism” are not responsible for that. There are many factors at play, but it has very little (if anything) to do with some people lacking belief in the biblical god.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Can you explain why you think they are unrelated. It seems very clear to me that when we raise entire generations of youth with the belief that God is a fairy tale, there are consequences. Such as those listed. The natural man can we quite evil and destructive to others. The man or woman filled with the Holy Spirit (think Mother Teresa) is generally beneficial to those around them. I can speak from experience, not judgement. I rely on the holy spirit daily just to be a decent husband and father.


      1. Well atheism, for one, is simply a lack of belief in gods. It does not imply a greater degree of immorality. Frankly, I think I’m more moral now than when I was a Christian. I’m not convinced that one’s belief or lack therefore determines their moral integrity. If you are a moral person, which you seem to be, it’s because that’s who you are – a good person.

        Also, atheism is not the belief that God is a fairytale (I.e. disbelief in God). It’s a lack of such a belief in God. Let me know if you need clarification on this distinction.

        Though I think it’s highly unlikely that any god exists, I’m still open to the possibility. There are some atheists though who are not.

        Second, evolution is just a natural process. I’m guessing you mean the teaching of evolution. To illustrate how this objection sounds (I’m not trying to be offensive, but just hoping to help you see it from a different perspective), let me ask you a question: Would you want your kids to not be taught arithmetic if it conflicted with the Bible? If God said “Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Where is the mathematician? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?”, would you then be opposed to mathematics?

        I think science is just a means to understand the world. The best one that we have right now.

        As to your comment about the natural man being evil, I’m thoroughly convinced that is just a Christian perception. If it was true, it would mean that every one (regardless of their religion or lack of religion) who was not Christian would be evil. That’s simply not true.

        Men or women filled with the ” Holy Spirit” can be good people; that I don’t deny. But they can also be very bad people. Mother Teresa, for instance, was far from perfect.

        As to you relying on the Holy Spirit to be a good husband and father, I would have to say that you already are a good husband and father (since you actually care about it). If you are willing to improve, you’ll become even better.

        So the issues you listed are not a result of “godlessness”. They’re a result of both “godly” and “godless” people making bad choices.


      2. In response to your 1st point about being more moral now then you were before, I just wonder how any atheist can define morality because it is traditionally been defined by religious criteria. Upon what basis do we choose something to be moral or not moral


      3. Without religion, people have to think for themselves beyond simple obeying. They might think of effectiveness and consequences of their actions. Religions do not have a monopoly on morals, that is beyond doubt. No thinking person would want such a monopoly when they’ve seen the moral codes found in books like the old testament.
        Your question, how do we decide on what’s moral – we discuss, we look at research, and make collective decisions on moral codes. Decisions are made in local and national governments and enforced by police and law courts
        I don’t need to spell that out, you already know it because you see it all around you. Christian morals come from the same place for all of us – society.


  2. Let’s say morality originates from religion. Why is it that morality differs between religions? Why is it that even in a single religion, morality evolves with time?


    1. It is only logical that different religions would have different ideas of morality. Most religions are merely man’s attempts to approach God. The internal man, the soul and spirit of man, longs for closeness with the Creator. However, all religions are different in their approaches (since most religions are the creation of men). If there is, as I believe, an actual absolute Truth in the universe, and that Truth is God, then logically there is only ONE best way to approach Him. It is our job in this life to seek out and understand that one best path to the best of our abilities. As to the evolution of morality, I would point out that we view our “morality” as superior to that of past societies, but we compare ourselves with the Dark Ages and primitive societies. Many ancient societies had FAR more understanding of moral an spiritual issues than the vast majority of people today.


      1. How do you know which god is the true God (and by implication which moral system is the true)?

        My point about morality evolving was not that it becomes better. My point was the morality changes with time within religions.


      2. I was raised in an offshoot of the Mormon church. I found by reading and studying and prayer that the theology of the entire Mormon religion was based on false history. I discovered that Joseph Smith was a false prophet. I left the RLDS church and was shunned by many for my decision.
        At that point I was not even sure the Bible was true. So I embarked on a 2 year intense study of the Bible. I studied at Trinity College of the Bible and found that the Bible is historically, and archaeologically sound. It in internally coherent, despite being written by dozens of authors over thousands of years. It contains hundreds of prophecies that were fulfilled, and we can document the times and circumstances of their writing. It has been proven to stand against all challenges for thousands of years, and it speaks to the most intense, and personal needs of humanity. It recognizes our sin nature and offers an opportunity for redemption, and many thousands have personally experienced healing of many types. At that point I was convinced.
        Hebrews 11:6 says, “But without faith it is impossible to please Him. For he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.” I believe you will find this scripture to be absolutely true. I would bet my life on it.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. At this point, I just want to say thank you for your patience and willingness to answer my questions. This discussion has been quite interesting.

        This may mean nothing to you, but I also want to say that I’m sorry for the people that shunned you. I don’t even know what to say of such people. If they were close to you, I guess the only thing you can do is hope they eventually realise you are more important than their religion. For now, you have family and friends, I’m sure, who love you.

        Again, thanks for your time.

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Very kind of you. However, my suffering is nothing compared to what Christ suffered on the cross to pay for my sins, and to offer me the possibility of salvation. I am blessed, because He said those who believe in Him will be persecuted.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s