Twenty amino acids, one hundred fifty positions, and one question biochemists actually argue about: how rare is a sequence that folds into something useful?
Russell’s orbiting teapot and the Flying Spaghetti Monster are very good jokes and very poor arguments. Here is exactly where the analogy breaks — and where it lands.
The manuscript variant count is real and enormous. Understand where it comes from and the objection does not weaken. It reverses.
Stage Two · Identity — what actually goes in the place of the belief you just named A man is
Apologetics · Intelligent Design On a clear night you can walk outside, look up, and see the actual structure of
Doctrine — theology with its boots on Ask a room full of Christians whether Jesus ever sinned and every hand
Job demanded an explanation for his suffering. God answered with seventy questions about creation. Why the doctrine of creation is the answer God Himself chose to give.
A question Socrates asked 2,400 years ago is still the sharpest thing the New Atheists have. It deserves a real
Naturalism can describe what you believe. It cannot tell you what you owe. It is the line that ends the
The half of 1 Peter 3:15 that almost nobody quotes He brought it up over dinner. Some version of the
Apologetics · Creation — Theistic evolution and the image of God: where, exactly, does man begin? Most arguments about creation
Haeckel’s embryo grid was flagged as doctored within a decade and printed in textbooks for a century. The fraud is not an argument against Darwinism — but three things it exposes are.
Apologetics · Creation — what the Hebrew word min actually claims, and what it does not Ten times in the
Apologetics · Creation and Science — Intelligent Design “Intelligent design isn’t science.” That sentence ends more conversations than any argument
Stage Three · Renewal — Building New Thinking He had done the work. That is what made it strange. He
Apologetics · Creation — almost every argument about Genesis 1 is an argument about the winding. Scripture says the universe
The New Atheists called raising a child in the faith a form of abuse. Three claims are buried in that charge. One is a word trick, one is impossible, and one is a rebuke the church should accept.
Pure mathematics invented centuries early keeps turning out to be what the cosmos was running on all along. Naturalism can admit the fact. It cannot make it unsurprising.
Paul says creation is groaning and waiting to be delivered. Theistic evolution has to explain what it is groaning about.
Sooner or later somebody hands you the book of Joshua and asks you to defend it. Most Christians change the subject or answer too fast. Both are failures.
