Explore by Topic
Explore by Format
Search Results | 322 results found
In this short video from Ligonier, Stephen Meyer demonstrates not only some evidence for a beginning of the universe, but also how a scientist’s worldview and biases can direct and constrain his findings, distorting what he considers to be “scientific”—sometimes without his even realizing it. Even a scientist as great as Einstein.
Atheists will often assert that evolution is not random. (In fact, I was having this conversation just last night!) This is true if we’re talking about the natural selection part of the process, but natural selection can only select from what already exists. It’s the mutations that must provide the new genetic information, and mutations do not occur according to what is needed for an organism to survive; they can only cause the being to survive (and thus be selected) after they happen to occur.
Here's my response to this week's challenge: COMMENTS
Here’s another challenge from “40 Problems with Christianity”—one I’ve heard atheists cite before:
Evolutionists love to point to vestigial structures in the biological realm as evidence for evolution. The argument goes like this: Some organisms contain structures that were once functional in their evolutionary past but have now become useless (or almost useless). In The Greatest Show on Earth, Richard Dawkins writes, “Vestigial eyes are evidence of evolution. Given that a cave salamander lives in perpetual darkness so has no use for eyes, why would a divine creator nevertheless furnish it with dummy eyes, clearly related to eyes, but non-functional?”
Alan’s, Tim’s, and Brett’s February newsletters are now posted on the website:
Here's my response to this week's challenge: COMMENTS Read more posts
One of my favorite things to talk about is the evidence for intelligent design. In particular, I’m fascinated by the work of Stephen Meyer in Darwin’s Doubt and Signature in the Cell. When I speak about intelligent design to secular audiences, there is always some pushback.
Alan explains whether our value is derived from being sentient creatures. COMMENTS Read more posts
Tim explains whether or not evolution and intelligent design are compatible beliefs: COMMENTS Read more posts