Who among you fears the Lord and obeys the voice of His Servant?

Opening Weekend for “Expelled”

Well – after much praise and (perhaps) much  more criticism, “EXPELLED” opened in theaters (c. 1000) throughout USA.  Here is how it did at the box office:

“Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” a rare documentary opening in wide release, debuted at No. 9 with $3.1 million. Released by Rocky Mountain Pictures, the film features Ben Stein as he challenges Darwinian theories that prevail in academic circles and suggests that life could have emerged through intelligent design.”

Is this good? Is it bad? I do not know.  But it looks like quite a few people will get to see it.

In any case – it will most likely generate some continued debate.  Let’s hope this will be civilized and will contribute toward a better understanding of what is false and what is true in all camps.  For none of the camps owns the “truth,” (in spite of the rhetoric) especially since many don’t believe that such a thing exists in the first place 🙂

For a very intelligent and useful discussion based on this movie, see 

8 responses

  1. onein6billion

    1000+ theaters times 5 showings times 3 days times 200 seats = 3,000,000 possible viewings. But the reality was only about 500,000. Then down to only another 100,000 in the next week. Hurry – it will be gone very soon. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

    “For none of the camps owns the ”truth””

    If you want continued debate, you would need to agree on a definition of “truth”. The sky is blue, roses are often red, water is wet, and evolution is obviously true. And “intelligent design” is obviously not science.

    April 27, 2008 at 10:43 pm

  2. Mark – for your sake I am glad that Expelled did the way it did. I hope you can sleep better at night now 🙂 Honestly.

    As far as TRUTH is concerned…I was referring specifically to the relationship between Darwin and Hitler etc…It is NOT that simple and clearcut as any of the camps want to make it. (That is: there is NO connection between Darwin and Hitler = TRUE. Or – Darwin’s teaching led to Hitler = TRUE.) The truth is more nuanced than either of these positions, though I have no qualification at this point to discuss this issue. Have you read both sides of the story? I haven’t. If you are sure that there is no connection – I recommend that you read this book by RIchard Weikart. Maybe you will change your view once you have more of the evidence in front of you-?


    Here is a short evaluation of the book:

    “Richard Weikart’s outstanding book shows in sober and convincing detail how Darwinist thinkers in Germany had developed an amoral attitude to human society by the time of the First World War, in which the supposed good of the race was applied as the sole criterion of public policy and ‘racial hygiene’. Without over-simplifying the lines that connected this body of thought to Hitler, he demonstrates with chilling clarity how policies such as infanticide, assisted suicide, marriage prohibitions and much else were being proposed for those considered racially or eugenically inferior by a variety of Darwinist writers and scientists, providing Hitler and the Nazis with a scientific justification for the policies they pursued once they came to power.” — Richard Evans, Professor of Modern History, University of Cambridge, and author of The Coming of the Third Reich

    I only wish that you (and others) were so enraged when Dawkins (an others) draw with a similar wide brush the connection between Christianity and atrocities that were comitted. I can clearly and easily demonstrate to you that the atrocities of people who called themselves Christians have nothing to do with Christ (his teachings and example). Hower- a real Christian is supposed to be a follower of Christ (or a “little Christ”). At least that is what the word “Christian” means.

    Blessings and peace,

    April 28, 2008 at 1:01 am

  3. Mark – you may also want to look at the response to Weickart’s critics. It is clear that he does NOT draw a clear line between Darwin and Hitler. The truth is more nuanced.

    See his answer to his critics here:

    And here is his conclusion which seems very balanced to me:

    What I demonstrated in detail in my book is that many leading Darwinists themselves argued overtly that Darwinism did indeed undermine the sanctity-of-life ethic, and they overtly appealed to Darwinism when they promoted infanticide, euthanasia, racial extermination, etc. I specifically noted that not all Darwinists took this position, but those who did were leading Darwinian biologists, medical professors, psychiatrists, etc. They were not some fringe group of ignorant fanatics; they were mainstream Darwinists. Also, I did not simply show that leading Darwinists supported eugenics, infanticide, euthanasia, and racial extermination; I showed that they appealed overtly to Darwinism to justify their position. So, it is not Weikart who is reading Darwinism into the record. Darwinists themselves made these arguments. Therefore, critics of the position that Darwinism devalues human life should not attack me, but rather should attack those Darwinists I exposed in my work.

    April 28, 2008 at 1:15 am

  4. onein6billion

    If power-mad people want to justify their actions by appealing to “common sense” that we should eliminate the unfit, etc., that has nothing to do with the truth/falsity of the Modern Theory of Evolution. Don’t blame a scientific theory for this “value judgment”.

    If power-mad people want to kill people in the name of the Spanish Inquisition, that has nothing to do with the commonly-accepted tenants of Christianity. Don’t blame a religion that is supposed to have good value judgments for a specific case of bad value judgment.

    If certain adherents of a particular religion blow themselves up, hmmm.

    Goggle “national review john derbyshire expelled”.

    May 2, 2008 at 6:05 am

  5. Mark – I did not say it has anything to do with the truth/falsity of the theory. I believe with Keller (and the Bible) that the human heart is twisted and can take almost any theory and ideology to do bad things (yes- Christianity too).

    Having said that – it is ok for us (and desirable) to search and inquire if a movement that develops from a religion or a theory is consistent with that religion/theory. To pursue your example – it is worth inquiring if Islam’s teachings are compatible or not with people blowing themselves up.

    Some believe and have believed that it is consistent with the theory of evolution to treat others as less intelligent and inferior (less evolved), and many agree that the theory does lessen the value and dignity of human life (or course – another course is to bring animal life up to the level of human life since the two are the same). When human life is nothing more than animal life – I believe that it is hard to justify human rights and morality…why not just behave like the rest of the animal kingdom and be ruthless and cruel in the desire for survival. Who are we humans (and why?) to go against the nature and all of a sudden declare that what is happening there is cruel and below our dignity??

    I certainly do not see how the theory of evolution can help defend and enhance human dignity, much less human rights etc. What do you think? At least this is how I see it.

    I will google that.


    May 5, 2008 at 1:34 am

  6. P.S. For an alternative – you may want to read David Klinghoffer’s review also by National Review. I think he makes a very powerful argument about the connection between Darwin and the Nazis. What do you think?

    He does make the following two observations:

    While it must be very clearly emphasized that the gentle-souled Darwin himself never supported ill treatment of any race or group, his words inspired a movement to “scientific” racism.

    None of which, of course, is an argument against Darwin’s theory, narrowly defined, which could still be true as most but not all biologists believe, despite having deadly implications.

    May 5, 2008 at 2:06 am

  7. onein6billion

    “Some believe and have believed that it is consistent with the theory of evolution…”

    But the theory of evolution is just a scientific theory. It has no “value” content. If someone tries to make a moral judgment in the name of a scientific theory, it is not justifiable.

    “I believe that it is hard to justify human rights and morality.”

    If you get caught, you may go to jail.

    “despite having deadly implications”

    Riiiight. We’ve had so many Hitlers employing those “deadly implications” in the last 70 years.

    May 13, 2008 at 4:26 am

  8. And if you don’t get caught??

    May 13, 2008 at 5:28 am

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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