Why you should become a Bible-believing anarchist
who also believes the universe was created around 4004 B.C.
"Psychosis" is defined as a belief which is not grounded in reality.
Some Evolutionists say Christianity is a psychosis.
I say evolution is a psychosis.
I also say evolution is a religion.
Paul Tillich was one of the five highest ranking professors at Harvard University. He defined "religion" as "ultimate concern." In this sense everyone is religious, though some people live out their religion with passionate devotion, and other people are just duds. The "ultimate concern" for evolutionists is not "the facts," but making sure that Christianity is excluded.
Digression: duds make Jesus puke:
"I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth."
Revelation 3:15-16
Tillich's definition fits well with the Biblical perspective, which sees everyone as religious, though some live out the true religion, while others suppress the truth and create their own religion; a false religion, from the Biblical perspective. There is an almost endless variety of false religions that oppose the religion of the Bible. The details of these false religions are unimportant compared to the true religion. It's very binary: Biblical religion vs. all the other religions.
St. Augustine alluded to this binary conflict in his book The City of God, which described the conflict between the "City of God" and the "City of Man." The City of God is the Kingdom of God, or Empire of God. Rushdoony called the "City of Man" "The Society of Satan." When Tertullian asked, "What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" he was asking, What does the City of Man have to do with the City of God? Implied answer: nothing.
Individual people may not be entirely binary, that is, are not completely consistent with the religion of their choice. Atheists who claim there is no God find it difficult to live out a life with no morality or explanation for order. Even some Christians who claim to follow the true religion mix in elements of false religions to justify their own sin. But this binary categorization is still useful as a target: we should be shooting for the true religion in every area of life. Augustine's "City of God" is the "Religion of God," and the City of man is the religion of man, or the many false religions of man.
After Paul Tillich defined "religion" as "ultimate concern," Evolutionist high priest Theodosius Dobzhansky spoke of "The Biology of Ultimate Concern." Evolution is a religion.
The Bible says the most religious person is an "antichrist." Or just as religious as the most religious Christian.
A person who hates the God of the Bible with passion and ferocity and goes around trying to convince Christians not to believe in God is a very religious person. We might say "anti-religious," but still "devout" and "religious."
The "institutional church" purveys things like "sacraments" and "sermons." These things have nothing to do with Biblical Christianity. Many people who say they hate Christianity actually hate "the institutional church."
Throughout human history, there have been two religions: Theonomy and Autonomy. God's Law and self law. Obedience and rebellion.
R.J. Rushdoony defines "religion" not merely as a system of worship or belief, but as the foundational principle by which all of life—including thought, law, society, education, and family—is structured and understood. In Rushdoony’s presuppositional framework, every sphere of life rests on ultimate commitments, and the ultimate source of definition, law, and order is God. For him, religion is the necessary presupposition for all knowledge and action: grounding any aspect of life or thought on anything other than God is not simply mistaken, it is blasphemous.
According to Rushdoony, every legal system expresses a form of religious faith—whether explicitly theistic or implicitly humanistic—and thus law and morals always reflect the underlying religion of their society. Secular and humanistic approaches, for Rushdoony, constitute rival religions that elevate human reason, autonomy, or the state to a position of ultimate authority, which he strongly rejects. In this sense, Rushdoony's definition sees religion as the root of culture and civilization, shaping social institutions, ethics, and personal life from top to bottom.
"God" (Creator) is not essential to "religion." Buddhism is a non-theistic religion. Secular Humanism is a religion. But whatever is "ultimate" is the "god" of that philosophy/religion/worldview. Today "statism" is the leading religion, a secular view which places the State as the apotheosis (deification) of Autonomous Man.
The word "creed" comes from the Latin word credo, which means "I believe."
The Nicene Creed begins:
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
The evolutionist creed begins:
I believe in one Big Bang, maker of heaven and earth.
Both are creeds ("I believe"); both are religions, the "ultimate concern" of the respective believers.
Evolution is a false religion. Not all religions are true.
James 1:27 says that true religion is protecting widows and orphans. Jesus and the prophets reject the idea that true religion is temple liturgies and sacraments; true religion is loving God and loving your neighbor. A false religion rejects God and seeks to rule over your neighbor. Evolution is a false religion.
You have been brainwashed for 13, 17, or 20+ years in evolutionist schools to say, "No, evolution is not a religion; evolution is science."
If you dig deeper than your public school indoctrination, you will gain a new perspective. You have never heard all of the arguments and historical evidence presented in this paper. I must ask you to suspend judgment for the time being, and internalize the evidence presented. I know I'm asking a lot. I'm trying to condense 17 years of learning (that you might have received in Christian schools) into an hour or two. I'm not expecting to completely persuade you, but simply plant a seed.
Now we come to the combination of Biblical Creationism and Anarchism. Why would an anarchist lean toward creationism?
Here is the answer in a nutshell:
Evolution is a religious view that justified archism.
That claim is strange because we (modern Americans) don't fully understand why evolution became so popular so quickly in the post-enlightenment age.
The Enlightenment was not just about "science," but also about "politics."
It was also the beginning of "the sexual revolution."
Evolution justifies rejecting God as Creator and Lord. Evolution justifies rejecting the pacifism of Jesus. It justifies rejecting monogamous heterosexual marriage.
Evolution means Man gets to be his own god.
This isn't just about "science." It's about The State.
I would go so far as to say you're not a real "Christian" if you do not obey these two commands. You're something else. You might be a decent parent, and a good worker on the job, but you're not a "Christian" -- a follower of Jesus the Christ -- if you're not committed to obeying these commands. A great theologian named J. Gresham Machen (/ˈɡrɛsəm ˈmeɪtʃən/; | GRESS-um MAY-chin) wrote a book called Christianity and Liberalism. Machen was pushed out of the Presbyterian church and Princeton Seminary when both institutions went liberal. He founded the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and Westminster Seminary to perpetuate a Reformed Protestant Bible-believing church and seminary. Machen correctly concluded that liberalism is not a different form of Christianity, but a completely different religion. These denominations would be classified as "liberal":
But there are many smaller churches and "mega-churches" that focus on entertainment more than Biblical doctrine, and these churches would also be called "liberal." Jesus told the thief on the cross that he would be in paradise (Luke 23:43), and there may be true Christians in false churches, but institutionally speaking, these are false churches.
The Bible has a supernatural worldview. Liberalism denies supernatural phenomena. Liberalism is naturalism, and those liberal churches affirm evolutionism.
Machen's book shows how liberal churches have a completely different view than the Bible on key issues:
Chapter 2: Doctrine: Liberals believe that state-orchestrated "social progress" is more important than Biblical doctrines.
Chapter 3: Liberals have a different view of God and of Man than the Bible teaches.
Chapter 4: That's because liberals believe the Bible is not the word of God, but a collection of the words of men that evolved over the centuries.
Chapter 5: Liberals have a different view of Christ than the Bible.
Chapter 6: Liberals have a different conception of salvation than the Bible
Chapter 7: Liberals have a different view of "the Church" than the Bible. (The liberal Presbyterian church de-frocked Machen for setting up an independent missions organization because the church's missions were not preaching the Biblical doctrine of salvation.)
I agree with Machen's analysis of liberalism. I agree with Machen's view of the Bible. Yet, ironically, Machen would not have agreed with me and this website.
I consider Machen to be an ally and comrade. I think I could persuade him to be an anarcho-creationist if he could travel through time from 1935 (when he was defrocked by the liberal Presbyterian church) to our day in 2026. (If I were to travel back in time to his day, I don't think I could have persuaded him. If he could see into his future, he would overwhelmingly agree with this website.) I would like to consider you too, dear reader, to be persuadable.
Christianity is a supernatural religion. Creation and redemption are supernatural actions. Revelation is supernatural. Buddhism and Secular Humanism are natural religions; "Nature" is all there is. No Creator, no Lawgiver (Isaiah 33:22). Naturalism is atheism.
Theological "Liberalism" -- as seen in mainstream denominations -- is an attempt to naturalize Christianity. This was the point made by J. Gresham Machen in his book Christianity and Liberalism. Machen correctly concluded that liberalism is not a different form of Christianity, but a completely different religion.
Since liberalism is naturalism, liberal churches affirm evolutionism.
How does Theonomic anarcho-pacifism relate to the Theory of Evolution?
That's what this website is all about.
What I want to prove to you is that the "Theory of Evolution" is actually a religion which was invented to justify archism.
When I say evolution is a religion, I mean it is not purely "scientific." It has never been the case that someone who believed the Bible discovered "facts" that made it "rationally" or "scientifically" impossible to believe that the world is as young as the Bible says it is, and was forced by the "facts" to reject the Bible. There are no such "facts."
"Facts" are always interpreted according to some "paradigm" or presupposition.
Rather, those who rejected the Bible did so because they didn't want God telling them what to do (law). So they invented a new history of the cosmos to replace the history recorded in the Bible. This revisionist history left God out of the picture, and left Man free to be his own god. Man became his own law-giver and salvation-bringer (messiah).
There are many people known as "scientists" who come very close to admitting what I just said. They unanimously agree that they don't believe the religion of the Bible.
Chapter 14 - In the Minds of Men, Fifth Edition: The Road to Atheism [Evolution as Religion]