Atheistic Evolution Theory Destroyed by Science - An Overview on Creationism

(photo - creation.com)

In the grand scheme of things, refuting any one particular transcendental belief system like Christianity over Islam is irrelevant unless one deals first with the foundations of modern materialistic atheism. In Mike Shoesmith's recent debate against four atheists it was evident that a great gulf of ignorance exists as to the very understanding of what atheism is on the part of the atheists themselves. A surprising amount of time was spent coaxing the four into finally admitting that modern naturalistic atheism is nothing more than the philosophy of naturalism - the positive assertion that nothing exists apart from nature. Once that definition is established, corralling the atheists into a very small cage, their position is easily refuted.

Logically speaking, atheism once intellectually defined is indefensible. It forces the adherent to eliminate even the remotest possibility that the supernatural exists. Such a fallacy, the converse fallacy of accident, makes such a leaping claim based solely on either the desire to be in control through intellectual means (nature can be carnally understood therefore nothing supernatural exists) or by virtue of a lack of experience extrapolated to the entirety of that which can be experienced - as though after dipping a cup into the ocean one declares that the contents of the cup are all that could ever exist, purposely ignoring the ocean directly in front of them.

The evidence, as pointed out by Richard Dawkins, is based almost entirely on biological evolution - atheism's 800 pound straw man. Because species within a kind are shown to change, adapt, or speciate over time this observation (predicted by the Bible coincidentally) has been co-opted into the atheist mindset to be proof that no gods are needed for life to exist. Essentially this is what we have going on here. As Dawkins has repeatedly said - "Evolution is the engine which drives modern atheism".

Yet if speciation, adaptation, or whatever one chooses to call it is the real topic of conversation then even the most hard-line creationist is an evolutionist. We as creationists do not deny the science - we embrace it. We know that speciation is real science because it has been and continues to be observed scientifically. Yet when we observe the reality of different species of equine or canine we simply look to the Bible and say "ah yes, just as Noah brought 2 of every kind onto the ark we can safely predict that all the species we see today would come from that event". All dogs, for example, come from a mating pair of wolves and when we examine the equine kind we see it hitting the reproductive barrier when horses mate with donkeys and produce the mule - a universally sterile creature.

Likewise for the hero of modern atheism - bacteria. When bacteria are observed to speciate over many generations because of natural influence it is heralded as proof of atheistic evolution yet what we are really observing is one form of bacteria becoming another form of bacteria without offering any reason at all to suggest a prediction that microbe-to-man evolution is even remotely possible. Not only is this postulation not science it is an insult to those who actually take science seriously.

Please watch this short video from chess-master and scientist Johnathan Sarfati explain in greater detail the connection between atheism and evolution.