Over the many years since I graduated from medical school, the knowledge of how the complex and unique DNA molecule functions in the cell has increased greatly. Much of what is now basic knowledge of molecular genetics was only touched on when I was in high school and medical school. The human genome had not yet been fully decoded. The more I learn about this amazing molecule, the more convinced I am of the impossibility that it evolved by random chance under the guiding hand of natural selection.
At this difficult time, a laugh is sorely needed, and one has been provided for us by evolutionary scientists at Cambridge University. The headlines are breathless and triumphant: One of Darwin’s evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher (Phys Org) Scientists ‘prove Darwin’s survival of the fittest theory’ (ITV) One of Darwin’s Evolutionary Theories Has Been Proved by Scientists: ‘We Are Standing on the Shoulders of Giants’ (Newsweek)
The Bible has come under attack by liberal scholars using three main weapons: historical criticism, textual criticism, and Darwinism. The acceptance by evangelical scholars of the liberal paradigm assumptions has led to an erosion of belief in inerrancy and undermines the case for Christianity.
While CMI does excellent work in battling Darwinism, in the areas of historical criticism and textual criticism they readily defer to evangelical scholars such as James Patrick Holding, passing along liberal paradigm assumptions which undermine the credibility of the Bible and the doctrine of inerrancy.
Univocal propositional statements cannot be “interpreted” to mean something other than what the words and syntactical construction convey. If we can understand such statements made by people even though we are not infallible, we can understand God’s propositional statements in the Bible.
Krattenmaker’s belief that a recent Gallup poll proves Americans are turning against young earth creationism is premature. He did not look at long-term data. Nevertheless, the poll results are significant for Christians. A wrong view of origins is a symptom of the real problem, erosion of belief in inerrancy.
Meredith Kline, overlooking that Genesis 1 is full of miraculous acts, argues that Genesis 2:4-5 disproves six-day young-earth creationism, because if the divine providence was operating through normal processes, then, for example, plants could not have been created before the sun.
The claim that we share almost 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees was made before the chimpanzee genome was sequenced. After this was done, it was found that humans and chimps may share less than 70% of their DNA.
Lawrence Krauss suggests that the universe might have arisen from Nothing as a spontaneous quantum fluctuation. But this requires a quantum field, which is not “Nothing.” Something coming out of nothing violates the First Law of Thermodynamics, which is on much firmer ground than “Hawking radiation.”
Fact 1: Today the reader is a witness to the fact that a Christian Church exists Fact II: The Lord’s Day / The Christian Day of Worship – First Day of the Week (Sunday)Fact III: NT writings, over 5,800 Greek Manuscripts, Tens of Thousands of NT Manuscripts Other than Greek and …
An example of advanced scientific knowledge in the Bible is in Job 26, which states in verse 7, “He hangs the earth on nothing.” Job’s contemporaries all thought the earth must be resting on something. The “pillars of heaven” in verse 11 may refer to gas pillars such as the Cone Nebula or in the Eagle Nebula.
Old-earth creationists say that the Hebrew names of some carnivores show that animals ate one another before the Fall. But the Hebrew words for violence, death, and predation may actually have been coined after the Fall based on the names of the animals that were now seen doing such actions.
Bill Nye, the mechanical engineer and well known host of the 1990s Disney/PBS educational show “Bill Nye the Science Guy,” is an ardent advocate of the theory of evolution. On August 23, a video was posted on YouTube titled “Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate for Children.” It was designed to persuade people to stop teaching creationism to children and embrace evolution, yet for the thinking individual the video simply exposed the muddled thinking of Darwin’s disciples. The purpose of this article is not to “reinvent the wheel” by again arguing the …
In an opinion piece titled “Less God, more excuses” in this day’s National Post newspaper (p. A15), Charles Lewis writes the following: The most popular objection to religion is that it replaces thinking with sets of unproveable truths – and that the rules flowing out of those truths turn adherents into robots. Those who leave religion behind, we are led to understand, will begin to think for themselves and thereby exercise real freedom as responsible citizens. Lewis goes on to lament that this latter theory has not been fulfilled, but has instead …
Evolution is fundamentally dependent on chance. The probability of the simplest theoretical cell forming by chance is beyond the Universal Probability Bound, the absolute limit beyond which an event becomes impossible. Random chance, then, cannot explain the origin of life.