In the past, I had often thought a certain way regarding the difference between someone who claims to be an atheist versus someone claiming to be agnostic. My understanding had been that atheism was a very arrogant claim. My understanding was that to be an atheist, one was claiming that there was certainly no God.
Today, I heard what was most likely the most laughable argument against the historicity of the gospels that I have ever heard. It was a comparison of the oral tradition which passed down the accounts of Jesus of Nazareth until they were written down against the game of Telephone.
If you’ve been following along, over the past few weeks I’ve been breaking down some of the problems that I have with things like evolution and natural selection. Today, I want to address a concept that has been gaining popularity in order to explain how new genetic information could be generated.
When people think of Charles Darwin, they think of “the theory of evolution.” As I pointed out already, however, Darwin did not develop the theory of evolution. What his theory was about was the concept of natural selection as a mechanism for evolution.
One of the more hotly debated issues of evolution these days is the alleged lack of what are called “transitional forms.” This refers to the idea that, in the fossil record, one would expect to find fossils of creatures who exhibit various stages of form from one species to another. Evolutionists, of course, claim that these transitional forms exist and creationists claim that they do not.
