Evolution vs. God

Advertisements

About Ken Temple

I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I am a sinner who has been saved by the grace of God alone (Ephesians 2:8-9), through faith alone (Galatians 2:16; Romans 3:28; 4:1-16), in Christ alone (John 14:6). But a true faith does not stay alone, it should result in change, fruit, good works, and deeper levels of repentance and hatred of my own sins of selfishness and pride. I am not better than you! I still make mistakes and sin, but the Lord is working on me, conforming me to His character. (Romans 8:28-29; 2 Corinthians 3:16-18) When I do sin, I hate the sin as it is an affront to God, and seek His forgiveness in repentance. (Mark 1:15; 2 Corinthians 7:7-10; Colossians 3:5-16 ) Praise God for His love for sinners (Romans 5:8), shown by the voluntary coming of Christ and His freely laying down His life for us (John 10:18), becoming flesh/human (John 1:1-5; 1:14; Philippians 2:5-8), dying for sins of people from all nations, tribes, and cultures (Revelation 5:9), on the cross, in history, rising from the dead (Romans 10:9-10; Matthew 28, Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24; John 20-21; 1 Corinthians chapter 15). His resurrection from the dead proved that Jesus is the Messiah, the eternal Son of God, the word of God from eternity past; and that He was all the gospels say He was and that He is truth and the life and the way to salvation. (John 14:6)
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Evolution and Creation. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Evolution vs. God

  1. Dan says:

    Here is part of an argument from an article (The Burden of Damascus) on a site called ‘Dwindling in Unbelief’ between an evolutionist and ‘bob’ that may be of interest.

    The evolutionist, Steve Weeks, says:

    Well, I accept evolution as the explanation for the world as we see it, at least in terms of biologic diversity. So do virtually *all* scientists, because the evidence is so strong. Evolution (the process) is a *fact*. The “theory” part is that natural selection is the mechanism by which evolution occurs. The person who comes up with an alternative will win the Nobel Prize for sure, and surpass Darwin and Wallace in fame.
    Get to work, Bob! 😉
    Steve Weeks

    bob responds by quoting Steve’s comments in quotation marks with his (bob’s) comments interspersed:

    “Well, I accept evolution as the explanation for the world as we see it, at least in terms of biologic diversity.”

    That depends on what you call ‘evolution.’ When the evolutionist says, “biological diversity” they are claiming something that creationists recognise as a function of nature, that is, the inbuilt ability to adapt to various environments using information that already exists within the organism. But no new information is being created that can change a microbe into a man.

    “So do virtually *all* scientists, because the evidence is so strong. Evolution (the process) is a *fact*.”

    This is an equivocation in the use of the word ‘evolution’ where in one part of the argument it is used to describe the process of adaptation through natural selection, which creationists already recognized before Darwin, and then in another part of the argument it is applied to the notion that it has the power to change a germ into a German.

    “The “theory” part is that natural selection is the mechanism by which evolution occurs.”

    I think you will find that the “theory” part is actually due to the fact that no scientist can explain how life got started from inert chemicals. And in particular they cannot explain the origin of the vast quantities of information required for even the simplest life forms. Information itself needs to be set within a program in order to be functional and of any use which requires an information source and a programmer to install it. Obviously Blind, undirected, mindless forces cannot be the origin of ANY information, much less that which is required for even basic forms of life.

    Natural selection also needs something to select against. Without information natural selection does not exist either since it is itself information based with its own program set to perform its function within the multitude of all the other programs within a cell that go into making life possible.

    “The person who comes up with an alternative will win the Nobel Prize for sure, and surpass Darwin and Wallace in fame.
    Get to work, Bob! ;-)”

    We cannot claim credit for something that someone else has already invented, so the prize goes to God.

Comments are closed.