Skip to main content

Science is Impossible Without God

Addendum added 2-17-2019


Many people despise the truth, some do not know it, but science is impossible without God. In the same way, evolution is also impossible. Find out why.

For Question Evolution Day, we are going to examine something that atheists and other anti-creationists loathe, and something of which many professing Christians are unaware. Some people claim that evolution is science, but this shows the paucity of their understanding of the nature of science. Simply put, evolution is not only opposed to actual science, but science is impossible in an atheistic worldview.


via GIPHY

To be consistent, evolution is random, but its proponents want to perform science. If evolution were true, science would be impossible because the laws of logic, consistency of nature, and other things could not be consistent. Someone may object that they rely on their senses, but that is circular reasoning because they cannot know their senses are actually working; it could all be an illusion, false memories and all. Scientific predictions could not be made.

The Bible is true, God is the Creator, and he upholds all things. An atheist may get the bit in his teeth and jump the corral fence, saying, "I don't believe in God and I do science stuff anyway!" Yes, unbelievers can conduct scientific research and make predictions, but their rejection of God does not make any difference. The fact that God is real, making the laws of logic and nature possible is not negated by unbelief. It is akin to someone saying he doesn't believe in oxygen while using it.
Evolution is fundamentally incompatible with the scientific method.  That is, if neo-Darwinian evolution is true, then there would be no rational basis for trusting in scientific procedures.  Conversely, if science is a reliable tool for understanding how the universe works, then particles-to-people evolution cannot be true.  Here is why:
To read the rest of the article, click on "Evolution vs. Science". I recommend that you bookmark it or even save a copy to your ebook reader because it's worth reading a few times.

ADDENDUM: Dr. Lisle posted feedback where an angry atheist attacked the post and Dr. Lisle himself. The atheopath has the focus of a ball bearing in a blender, and did not have anything rational to say. To read this, click on "Is Genesis Historic and Reliable?"



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Evaluating Truth Claims in Genesis

Some people try to dismiss Genesis as myth containing spiritual truth using elements from the pagan neighbors of the Hebrews. Others say it is misunderstood, as if the Creator of the universe was unable to communicate with us. With closer inspection, we see that Genesis is a historical narrative. Credit: RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander The idea that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological should not be accepted by professing Christians, as there are serious problems that result. (One of these is that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others referred to these chapters as literal history, so by denying this, one is calling them liars!) Also, there are repercussions with the gospel message. Read some classical mythology, then come back to Genesis and see the difference. Myths are vague and have a different flow, but the Bible is precise. Indeed, even the sequence of creation days is specific — a day itself is defined. Interestingly, many translations have in Genesis 1:5 less accurate by us