Christian Apologists write deceiving books and produce dishonest films to con people into believing their claims. Such a multitude of lies is harmful for society and morally unjust. Together we can expose their lies and pave the way for an honest future.
» About This Site
 Gregory Koukl |
|
| “ |
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.
http://str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5494 |
” |
|
There really is nothing to support this ridiculous claims that Gregory Koukl is making here. Evolution is called a fact because it IS supported by the overwhelming evidence (Learn More).
|
|
|
Gregory Koukl |
|
| “ |
For evolution to be a fact, you must have two things, minimally. First, you’ve got to have life coming from non-life--abiogenesis.
http://str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5494 |
” |
|
No, the theory of evolution only explains how life evolved, hence the name. It has nothing to do with where life came from. Heliocentrism is the theory that the planets in our solar system orbit around the sun. We don’t need to know where the sun and planets came from in order to know that heliocentrism is a fact. The theory of gravity explains why objects fall towards the earth but it does not need to also explain where the objects came from for gravity to be a fact.
|
|
|
Gregory Koukl |
|
| “ |
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.
http://str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5494 |
” |
|
Nothing could be further from the truth. Gregory Koukl obviously has absolutely no clue of what he is talking about when it comes to science. Not a single bit of evidence has ever emerged in the past 150 years that contradicts the general outline of evolution. Genetics alone is the biggest evidence for evolution. The increasing knowledge over time has only expanded our understanding of evolution and is why it’s not considered a scientific fact. As for life being too incredibly complex to derive from natural means, this bogus claim has already been shot down by the evidence (Read More).
|
|
|
Gregory Koukl |
|
| “ |
By definition, evolution offered an explanation for how things got to be the way they are without God (I’m referring to what’s known as the "general theory of evolution"). This is why it made such a splash. Do you think that if God could be worked into the evolutionary picture, then evolution would have taken off the way it did? Of course not.
http://str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5494 |
” |
|
Although we now know how species have evolved from previous species and all the evidence shows this evolutionary journey was caused by natural means without the guidance of a god, this does not automatically exclude the possibility of a god putting all of this into motion. If the evidence pointed that a god was in fact involved with the process of evolution then that would have made a huge splash. Not only would scientists have a scientific explanation for all of lives diversity but that would also mean that there was evidence for a god. Everyone would have been happy.
|
|
|
|
Site Navigation
This is a user submitted site.
We do our best to screen rebuttals to make sure content is accurate.
|
|
Resources
|
Creation Museum
Books
Films