Thursday, August 19, 2010

Greg Koukl - The Handy-Dandy Evolution Refuter

I was reading a very interesting article, called Evolution - Philosophy, Not Science, by apologist Greg Koukl, on his website, Stand to Reason. The article contained a very brief, but powerful argument against Evolution. Here's a portion of the article:

The real question is whether the evidence supports evolution or not, not whether we can baptize evolution with the word "God" so Christians feel comfortable.

To put it simply, lest there be any confusion about the matter, evolution must be dealt with scientifically, on its own merits. Is it an adequate explanation of the origin of things?

I think it's wholly inadequate. The more knowledge we get, the more problems we see with the origin of life by evolutionary means--the more problems we see with the change from one kind of life into another by evolutionary means.

The passage of time and the increase of knowledge haven't helped evolution; they've hurt it. Evolution was popular early on precisely because there was so little information about the process. Now we know much more about the details of biochemistry and genetics, and information theory, and the incredible complexity of even the simplest living thing. It's become evident that evolution is just not capable of explaining life.

You want proof for that? Here, it's very simple. This is my handy-dandy evolution refuter. It's the simplest way I know to right to the heart of the problem, proving that evolution is not based on fact, but on philosophy.

For evolution to be a fact, you must have two things, minimally. First, you've got to have life coming from non-life--abiogenesis. Second, you've got to have a change in that life from simple forms to complex forms over time. You must have the kick-off, and you must have the rest of the game.

Now, here's my question: How did life come from non-life? How did the game get started by evolutionary means. Does anyone know? Guess what? Nobody knows. Oh, there are some ideas and people have suggested some possible ways, but nobody has sketched out any way that really answers the question. There are so many problems and complications. There are competing models that have been suggested, but they're just starting places. They're just ways of saying, "Let's start here, and we'll see where it leads." There are possibilities, but no one knows how it happened, or even how it could have happened in enough detail to be compelling."

Now, here's the kicker. If you don't know how it happened by naturalistic, evolutionary processes, how do you know that it happened by naturalistic, evolutionary processes? Evolution is claimed to be a fact, but you can't have the fact of evolution unless you have the fact of abiogenesis. Yet nobody knows how such a thing could ever take place. And if life can't be shown to have come from non-life, then the game can't even get started.

Then why do we call evolution a fact when evolution can't even get off the ground, based on the information we have right now. The answer you get is always the same: Because we're here. It must have happened . That's called circular reasoning, friends, based on a prior commitment to naturalism that won't be shaken by the facts.

Which proves that this is not about science, it's about philosophy.

Sunday, August 15, 2010

New Contributor

I have invited a good friend of mine to begin posting on this blog as well.

Hopefully we will be able to both make great contributions to this blog.

We are planning on doing some blog posts through a book of the Bible, possibly Philippians.

I'm quite excited about this!


Friday, August 13, 2010

Textual Criticism - 101

Here is a list of resources that I have found relating to Textual Criticism.


MP3 Lecture - KJV Onlyism and Can You Trust Your Translation?

Shorter lecture on the same subject, video, Reliability of the New Testament Text :

Response to common KJV Only arguments by Hovind:

Defense of KJV and Textus Receptus by Douglas Wilson:

What do you make of errors in KJV?:

Byzantine text over Alexandrian text?:

Why King James?

White vs. Wilson - Discerning the Manuscript Traditions:

KJV 400 - Sermon by Doug Wilson.

Outline of D. A. Carson's Book "The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism" - Containing a Byzantine Text Type Refutation:

Hope this helps!

Second Chance?

Some believe, as the Jehovah's Witnesses do, that many will get a second chance after death. The Bible never mentions people having a second chance at life. The Scriptures clearly tells us that "it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment." (Hebrews 9:27 ESV) Jesus told the criminal on the cross, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."(Luke 23:43 ESV), not "You will have another chance to live a life on this earth." In Matthew 25:46 we are told that some "will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matthew 25:46 ESV) This tells us that believers get eternal life while unbelievers get eternal punishment.

The Bible also makes it clear that the resurrection of believers and unbelievers has not yet occurred, meaning that the bodies of the deceased are still in the grave.

"I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written: 'Death is swallowed up in victory.'" (1 Corinthians 15:50-54 ESV)

"But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord." (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 ESV).

At death, the Bible says that deceased believers are with the Lord. "So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight. Yes, we are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord." (2 Corinthians 5:6-8 ESV)"I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better." (Philippians 1:23 ESV) This is further confirmed by John. "When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne." (Revelation 6:9 ESV)

So, believers in heaven exist in non-bodily form, (i.e. spiritually/non-corporeally) waiting the resurrection. When an unbeliever dies, he also exists in a non-bodily/spiritual/non-corporeal form, but he is not in Heaven, but Sheol/Hades, the realm of the dead. Believers are resurrected at the Second Coming, and unbelievers are raised at the final judgment after the Millennium. Hades will be emptied before the Great White Throne, where its occupants will be judged.

Thus no one has a second chance at death. All wait, either waiting with the Lord or in Hades, until the Last Day when they are resurrected to face their Maker. Hopefully we are ready for this day by being found in Christ!!