Charles Darwin, Creationist at Heart?

Evolution and atheism cannot account for logic and science. When using them, atheists and evolutionists are borrowing from the biblical worldview, which is the only one that makes sense of these things.
It will come as a shock to many people, but Charles Darwin was actually a biblical creationist. No, he didn't want to be, and he never knew it himself.

The problem is that science, logic, morality, laws of nature, and more are not possible in an worldview based on materialism, atheism and evolutionism. Those are irrational paradigms. We expect laws of nature to be the same every day (or every minute). When I put my foot into the stirrup to saddle up, I expect to swing up and then sit in the saddle, not launch off into space because gravity suddenly changed. How can you perform science when things are changing? Yet, an evolutionary view is that life, the universe and everything are the products of time, chance, random processes, mutations and all that.

Laws of logic are not material; you can't trip over the Law of Identity, for example. It can be described and used, but not seen or held. In a random universe, laws of logic will pretty much be nonexistent and make it impossible to play poker. Wisdom comes from God (Prov. 1:7, Col. 2:3, James 1:5), and the wisdom of man is futility without God (Jer. 8:9, 1 Cor. 1:19-21, Psalm 53:1).

Atheism is incoherent and irrational, and cannot explain logic and science. Only the bibical worldview containts the necessary preconditions of intelligibility.

Only the biblical worldview, beginning at creation, is coherent and makes sense of logic, science, laws of nature and so forth. It's ironic that people who try to use science and logic to refute creation, the Bible and even God's existence are actually standing on the biblical creationist worldview in their attempts to refute it, because their own worldviews are fundamentally flawed. Cornelius Van Til had an illustration that a child could sit on her father's lap and slap his face. But she could only do so because he was supporting her. This is the same in the unbeliever's rebellion against God. Charles Darwin tried to use science (which is only possible because the Creator exists) to make his pseudo-scientific creation myth; he was a creationist and didn't know it.
Evolutionists often attempt to use observational science—arguments from biology, paleontology, geology, or even astronomy—to support their belief. But the really interesting thing is that they base all their arguments on principles that ultimately come from biblical creation! As strange as it may sound, evolutionists must unwittingly assume that creation is true in order to argue against it. That means that Darwin was (in a sense) a “creationist.” All evolutionists must borrow the principles of biblical creation in order to do science (even though they would deny this). Here is why.
You can read the rest of this startling, eye-opening article by clicking on "Darwin—Unwittingly a 'Creationist'". Also, I recommend an article that takes a different approach to the subject, "How Do We Know that the Bible is True?" ADDENDUM: A follow-up to this post is at "Atheism and Evolutionism Are Illogical".