I never said that we can convince unbelievers to believe (did you read my last response to you?). For the record, I am a 5 point Calvinist who fully adheres to the Westminster Standards (unmodified). So I know that only God's elect can believe the gospel, and that regeneration precedes or accompanies saving faith, and that salvation is by grace, not by works, lest any of us should boast.

That said, God in His infinite grace providentially leads many to Christian faith through many paths. Mine involved being active in science prior to becoming regenerate. Once I came to a saving faith, I had many struggles trying to reconcile apparent evidence for evolution with my faith. I examined at length theistic evolution and progressive creationism but have rejected both. Learning that the real issue is presuppositions/worldviews and not scientific facts, and that Genesis is indeed historical and literal regarding the creation account has greatly strengthened my faith. Yes, this knowledge is not a means of grace, but it is nevertheless gracious of God to grant it to me. It also greatly equips me in presenting the gospel to others because when they ask those hard questions (and they do) such as "what about starlight", "what about radiometric dating", I have plausible answers for them.

I will say in closing (since we're off topic a bit) that I fully agree with the article in that ignorance of world and church history is a bad thing. Old heresies have become the majority in the church today because of ignorance of our history (i.e. the answers to those heresies are there to be read), and the strong influence of our post-modern, moral relativistic culture that has infected the church.

Proverbs speaks of hearing two sides of the story & at times life can throw us a curve ball or spinner. The church after all has its dark stories & depressing situations.

Sure we have an everlasting & true hope to be found in Christ, but we also need to trust in His grace. My life has mountain top views & treks in dark valleys where its hard to shake off the shadows of sadness & despair...

If C.S Lewis(as an eg.) had not written the Narnia Chronicles we would be the lesser off for it.Christians are not called to deny their intellect but use it, such as any other gift they may have, learning how it all comes togther. The Apostle Paul spent much time debating/discussing. Id rather be doing other stuff but every now & then ideas converge & its an opportunity to share.

The church can be a very confusing place at times with all its differences, a bit like OT Israel with one saying & doing this, another saying that, like a busy & complex market place.Thank the Lord for the Word & Spirit. Samson trusted in his God given strengths only to be fooled by deception among other things,thankfully(in the end)he was able to bring down those who looked to Dagon. A sad end for his family but an answer to Samsons prayer.

My hope is in Christ & people coming to know more about Him, His justice, love & mercy.

I agree with Sarath. It is not our job to convince un-believers into believing. It is our job to lead them to God and then just let the Holy Spirit do His thing. Remember it is not "works", but grace through faith.

When you started your Christian life, did you start believing because there was convincing evidence of creation? I am guessing no. The Holy Spirit moved your heart and convicted you. That's when hearts start to soften and the conversion process sets in. So then, why do you feel the need to convert others in a way that even you didn't experience?

Again, I stress that God is spirit. In order for us to have a true meaningful relationship with God, we need to look towards spiritual things and not carnal things.

9But as it is written:
“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”
10But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. 11For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 1 Corinthians 2

The only way to strengthen our faith is through the Word of God, prayer, and fellowship among believers. Science and general knowledge does not strengthen our faith. It may explain many mysteries of the carnal world, but it will never ever explain God.

We all need to be humble, bow down and pray....

I won't trouble you or try and 'draw you off' into specific problems that evolution has in explaining other than to say the examples I mentioned were just that. As a scientist who specializes in computers science as applied to genetics, I find the most compelling evidence for young man/earth is genetic entropy, but I won't bore you with the details. Oh, I forgot, I and the (admittedly few) other researchers in my lab aren't "legitimate scientists", are we. Please don't tell my employer as they might take back all those outstanding achievement awards and fire me. You also know very well that creationist scientists who reveal their beliefs cannot get their research reviewed, let alone published, in any secular publications. That is why they had to set up their own peer reviewed magazines (e.g. The Journal of Creation).

Jim Kim:

The reason that we need to debate creation versus evolution origins sciences is twofold. First and foremost it is to strengthen the faith of believing Christians. Many a faith has been shipwrecked by pervasive evolutionary teaching. If Genesis is not true (e.g. no literal Adam and Eve and/or lots of death, disease & suffering prior to the fall), then the rest of the Gospel collapses. Jesus didn't need to come, He told lies and/or willfully mislead people referring to Genesis as literal history etc. etc. The fact of the matter is that those presenting evolution as fact have no credible explanations for the many 'exceptions' to physical laws (e.g. entropy) needed for evolution to be true.

The second reason to have the debate is to silence the mouths of the unbelievers (to the degree that is possible). The best examples of this are when we point out that the naturalism is an a priori bias that they usually refuse to admit, pretending that they are unbiased and neutral; or their tendency to not mention suppositions when they do their research, such as radiometric dating.

You berate Christians who are using their God given intellect to examine evidences and marry the same with biblical narrative as being lunatics who are not doing God any favours when it comes to converting people- "people who offer up Young Earth Creationism as a proof of the veracity of the Bible are a minority even among Christians, and send droves of intelligent, empirically minded, scientifically literate, spiritually seeking people away in gales of laughter, ensuring both their contempt and their non-conversion."

Yet you point out earlier that a creationist view is the only rational/logical view you can accept if you are to remain a Christian - "Either six-day, six-thousand-year-ago creation as described in Genesis is literally true, or the whole edifice of Christianity is false". This is perhaps the only thing upon which Ken and I agree".

I agree with Jin Kim, debating the matter with you is pointless. You seem to know your scripture, sadly Matthew 10:14-15 comes to mind. I pray you will have a change of heart.

I am afraid that you have misunderstood my point completely. I apologize if my earlier comments were not as clear. Let me clarify.

What I meant by "not getting into a scientific debate with non-believers" was that no matter how long and how hard the two sides debate, there will be no resolution. Firstly, the debate itself will never be a purely scientific one where we debate over known facts. The force that drives all living matter in the universe has never been proven or even identified. So it makes the debate a purely hypothetical in a scientific sense. Secondly, the interpretation and the point of perspective of the known fact or mechanism of life is totally different. The believer sees it as a beautiful harmony of science put together by God and all of His grace and therefore, praises and thanks God. On the other hand, the un-believer sees it as a "solved puzzle" reinforcing his/her opinion that God indeed does not exist. There will never be a definite winner in this debate. As long as we as believers make the mistake that spiritual things can be explained by carnal things, we are being duped by the devil into wasting our time and focus away from God's true intent for us. You cited 1 Peter 3:15 to rationalize your need for scientific data to answer for belief in God. I can wholeheartedly assure you that this verse is talking about spiritual things and not carnal things.

Now, the second point you made about my comment that I am advocating ignorance. This is not the case I assure you. I am merely advocating that all things should be done for the glory of God. That is, that we should strive to learn and to use the various wonderful gifts that God has given us for free. God has given us all of the universe for our benefit and use. When we use our knowledge to "un-lock" the mysteries of the world, we should learn to appreciate the greatness of our God rather than use it to prove that God does not exist. This is not the "laziness" that you seem to suggest that I advocated. God has given us freedom to explore His creations and in actuality, I believe He expects us to explore it. As we begin to "un-lock" the mysteries, we are to marvel and praise God for their beauty. I am sure it is a disappointment at the least for God, that His creatures are using His own creations as proof of His non-existence.

When Jesus healed the various sick and lame, no one came back at Him asking how He did it. All praised and glorified God with appreciation and thankfulness. I believe that this should be our attitude towards all the miracles of creation. When we set out to prove that God does not exist by our scientific ways, we are partaking in the very same lie that Satan unleashed on Eve. Satan told Eve that she can be like God. Aren't we saying the same thing when people such as yourself declare that "we will have a testable theory (and capacity) to create life from primordial chemicals"?

Be very careful where you drift off to Nathan.