We believe in a particular order not
because it is objectively true, but
because believing in it enables us
to cooperate effectively and forge a
better society” (pp. 123–124).
The reasoning seems to be
that, even though a certain view is
wrong, it may be best for society if
we nevertheless hold on to this belief
(‘imagined order’). Christianity, as
well as democracy and capitalism, are
said by the author to be examples of
imagined orders (ones that exist only
in our minds) (pp. 126–127). Perhaps
he should consider the possibility that
belief in evolution is an ‘imagined
order’—one detrimental to society.
The idea that “Evolution is based
on difference, not equality” (p. 122),
“that all men evolved differently”
(p. 123), seems to open the door to
beliefs that some people are superior
than others, although the author denies
there is evidence for this, later stating:
“Between blacks and whites there are
some objective biological differences,
such as skin colour and hair type, but
there is no evidence that the differences
extend to intelligence or morality”
(p. 152). Elsewhere he says that
“the biological distinctions between
different groups of Homo sapiens
are, in fact, negligible” (p. 161).
Such statements, regarding negligible
biological differences between people
groups, agree with the creationist
position, but it seems a bit odd that
this would be the case if indeed “all
men evolved differently” (p. 123).
Christian theology is blamed by
the author for getting the concepts of
‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’ wrong, as
“The theological meaning of ‘natural’
is ‘in accordance with the intentions
of the God who created nature’”
(p. 165). In Harari’s ideology God
does not exist; there is only evolution
without purpose (p. 165), and so to
him “from a biological perspective,
nothing is unnatural. Whatever is
possible is by definition also natural”
(p. 164). He later states: “There is little
sense, then, in arguing that the natural
function of women is to give birth,
or that homosexuality is unnatural.
Most of the laws, norms, rights and
obligations that define manhood and
womanhood reflect human imagination
more than biological reality” (p. 166).
Earlier in the book the author calls “the
biblical creation story, the Dreamtime
myths of Australian Aboriginals, and
the nationalist myths of modern states”
common myths that we weave (p. 27).
In discussing myths Harari states:
“There are no gods in the universe,
no nations, no money, no human
rights, no laws and no justice outside
the common imagination of human
beings” (p. 31).
If you deny God exists, then the
above is pretty much what you are
left with, a universe void of moral
absolutes. With evolutionary atheism,
any moral code can only ever be
relative, just a reflection of human
imagination. In the end, any such
moral code is meaningless anyhow,
as evolution does not care about right
and wrong, good and evil, natural and
unnatural, there being no purpose to
life, nor a higher authority who cares,
or to whom we must give account. The
good news is that God does exist, and
instead the biggest so-called common
myth woven is the evolutionary story.
A considerable portion of the
book is spent superficially discussing a
multitude of things, such as Buddhism,
money, empires, humanism, capitalism, etc., that in terms of the
creation vs evolution issue are arguably less relevant, and so were selectively left out to keep the review
down to a reasonable length. In
conclusion, as a Christian, I could not
in good conscience recommend this
book to anyone, as it is saturated in
evolutionary and atheistic philosophy,
and as a result gets many things wrong.
1. Hartnett, J.G., 20 big bang busting bloopers,
busting-bloopers/, 8 August 2016.
2. Sarfati, J., The origin of life; in: Carter, R.
(Ed.), Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels, Creation Book
Publishers, Powder Springs, GA, pp. 79–111,
2014; Meyer, S.C., Signature in the Cell:
DNA and the evidence for Intelligent Design,
HarperCollins, New York, 2009.
3. See, e.g.: Wieland, C., Making sense of ‘apeman’
claims, Creation 36( 3): 38–41, 2014; Line, P.,
Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—parts 1
& 2, J. Creation 19( 1): 22–42, 2005; Line, P.,
Explaining robust humans, J. Creation 27( 3):
64–71, 2013; Rupe, C. and Sanford, J., Contested
Bones, FMS Publications, 2017.
4. Gibbons, A., Neandertals mated early with modern
humans, Science 356: 14, 2017; Woodward, A.,
We may have mated with Neandertals more
than 219,000 years ago, newscientist.com/
July 2017; Posth, C. et al., Deeply divergent
archaic mitochondrial genome provides lower
time boundary for African gene flow into
Neandertals, Nature Communications 8:16046,
2017 | doi: 10.1038/ncomms16046.
5. Hublin, J-J. et al., New fossils from Jebel Irhoud,
Morocco and the pan-African origin of Homo
sapiens, Nature 546:289–292, 2017; Richter, D.
et al., The age of the hominin fossils from Jebel
Irhoud, Morocco, and the origins of the Middle
Stone Age, Nature 546:293–296, 2017; Stringer,
C. and Galway-Witham, J., On the origin of our
species, Nature 546:212–214, 2017; Gibbons,
A., Oldest members of our species discovered in
Morocco, Science 356:993–994, 2017.
6. Sanford, J., Brewer, W., Smith, F., and
Baumgardner, J., The waiting time problem in a
model hominin population, Theoretical Biology
and Medical Modelling 2015: 12–18, 2015 |
7. Gauger, A., Science and Human Origins; in:
Gauger, A., Axe, D. and Luskin, C. (Eds.), Science
and Human Origins, Discovery Institute Press,
Seattle, WA, p. 26, 2012.
8. Sanford, J.C., Genetic Entropy, 4th edn, FMS
9. Sanford, ref. 8, p. 127.
10. Holen, S.R. et al., A 130,000-year-old
archaeological site in southern California,
USA, Nature 544:479–483, 2017; Hover, E.,
Unexpectedly early signs of Americans, Nature
11. See, e.g.: Hodge, B., Tower of Babel: The Cultural
History of Our Ancestors, Master Books, Green
Forest, AR, 2012; Osgood, J., Over the Face of all
the Earth, John Osgood, Capalaba, QLD, 2015.