Love Truth Blog

Scientific explanations do not explain theism away, because they confirm the hypothesis that our Universe has been designed. Explanations for the motion of the planets, or mechanisms like photosynthesis do not 'explain God away.' the revelations of science raise further questions—questions that point to a theistic answer. Why do we live in a universe that is governed by laws and mechanisms? Why did the history of life on earth result in such bewildering diversity and beautiful complexity? Theism answers that the universe was created, and is ordered by a rational agent—God. ~ Graham Veale

Last weekend I had a chance to check out X-Men: First Class , and this blockbuster did not disappoint. It was a good story with lots of great epic battle scenes. The whole younger versions of Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr / Magneto (Michael Fassbender) recruiting the first team of X-Men to battle against Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), a mutant set on world domination was wonderful. One of the themes explored in the movie is how the advent of the nuclear age increased the number of genetic mutations giving rise to a number of mutant people with extraordinary abilities, which would be the next stage in evolutionary development of life on earth. Darwinian Evolution is the story’s explanatory power for mutants and why it is unnecessary to consider their powers as a condition that needs to be “fixed.” In this instance, the story villain Magneto gets it, in so far as he understands the implications of evolutionary theory—the more fit species will survive with the less fit...

I remember someone mentioning a conversation with a skeptic on the existence of God, wherein the skeptic essentially asked, “If God does not exist inside time or space and is immaterial, then in what way does He exist? Is God made of nothing?” At first glance this question certainly seems pretty difficult but nothing about it really creates a problem for a theist. The question presumes a materialistic world. In other words, the one asking already accepts the idea that the only thing that exists in the universe is material stuff, and apart from that there is nothing else that exists. All that can be physically detected, measured, quantified, and categorized is all that can exist in this universe. Since God does not fit into these categories, the skeptic questions in what way can there be a God. The skeptic’s strict materialism ultimately becomes a stumbling block from which he falls upon his own sword. What the skeptic fails to realize is that there are things which he too believes ...

According to lore, P.T. Barnum often displayed the Fiji Mermaid as a sideshow attraction, which was really the torso of a Monkey stitched together with the tail of a fish. Yet, this curiosity attracted great crowds and many traveling entertainers have since duplicated the stunt. This is certainly a fitting illustration for describing Dawkins’ recent lecture hosted by the Center for Ethics and Religion at Queens University in Charlotte. The event certainly unveiled the grandeur of Darwin’s Rottweiler’s oratory skills; however, just as those who believed the Fiji Mermaid exhibit to be the carcass of an actual living creature reminds us that there may be some truth to the adage “there’s a sucker born every minute,” one is to be discerning with what Dawkins’ hocks as facts for evolution. The evening’s lecture was divided into two parts: the first was Dawkins’ reading selections from his latest book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (Note the title hearkens to a tagli...

Today a colleague passed on Richard Dawkins’ Newsweek article wherein “Darwin’s rottweiler” went on another tirade against creationists. [1] As recent research on the Cambrian fossil records has hammered in the last nail in the coffin of Darwinian evolution, one of the last bad ideas of the nineteenth century that wreaked havoc in the twentieth century (another being Marxism), the rant is understandable. What is Dawkins’ response to the proposition that the fossil record in general and the Cambrian fossil record in particular fails to support the Darwinian model, he just pontificates, “We don’t need fossils in order to demonstrate that evolution is a fact. The evidence for evolution would be entirely secure even if not a single corpse had ever fossilized. It is a bonus that we do actually have rich seams of fossils to mine, and more are discovered every day.” Is not he just saying, “Don’t get bogged down with the facts, just believe me.” Dawkins’ then brings up some analogy of a baron...

In this fast paced Web 2.0 universe with real time updates, it seems like bringing up something that was a buzz a few years ago seems clueless. Sort of like finding out the cloths one wears have been out of style for the last two decades. Yet, lessons can still be learned about the hype of yesteryear, since time has a way of weeding out pop-culture novelties from the ideas that are really shaping the world. All this came to mind when I got an email inquiry about the Blasphemy Challenge on YouTube. So I checked out video, and there was this young fellow named Chandler who said, “Three months ago I was a Christian. Through basic observation of the world around me and logical thinking I’ve come to the conclusion that alongside the fact that there is no Santa Clause, there is no Easter Bunny, there’s also no God. So without further ado, my name is Chandler and I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit.” [1] Come to find out that this was part of a Rational Response Squad (RRS) and the Beyon...