Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 26 results found
Are Christians guilty of arbitrarily suggesting a "God of the gaps" when they argue that God created the universe? Or are atheists guilty of "science of the gaps"?
What are the consequences for morality if we evolved, if everything came from a materialistic process?
Has science proven there is no soul?
Are Christianity and science at odds by nature? Does theism prevent rational scientific study?
A frequent response to the evidence against the origin of life by Darwinian evolution is, “All the difficulties with the evolution of life only apply to life as we know it. But what about other kinds of life?” Greg responds.
A frequent response to the evidence against the origin of life by Darwinian evolution is, “All the difficulties with the evolution of life only apply to life as we know it. But what about other kinds of life?”
If Darwinism is true, then there is no purpose or meaning to life, there is no morality, there's no qualitative difference between humans and animals, there's no life after death, and there's no purpose to human history. Now, are you trying to tell me that it doesn't really matter if people believe we evolved or not?
Those who hold that science, by nature, cannot be integrated with theological views about the nature of the world, are out of step with a long history of science. This arbitrary, modern division between science and theology, making them enemies, was not made in the past. Most of the founders of modern scientific disciplines were Christians whose world-view was thoroughly integrated with their scientific practice. For example:
Has anyone else but me noticed an inherent contradiction in the underlying convictions that drive annual “Earth Day” celebrations? The vast majority of those who attend such fetes are Darwinists who believe humans have a moral obligation to protect the environment? My question is: Why?