Posted on 01/10/2005 2:47:28 PM PST by Mr. Silverback
"Someone needs to tell this 81 year professor from Oxford University that the Theory of Evolution does not speak to the issue of origins, therefore it must not, and cannot, be held accountable in this regard."
He quite logically, as many of us have, realized that when macro evolution is presented as a totally naturalistic mechanism (requiring no God) to account for the total diversity of life we observe in the present and in the fossil record, then a naturalistic origens of life is also implied. If there is no creator/designer, then life had to evolve/form from non-life.
Click the link below for the actual Habermas interview (also downloadable as .pdf):
http://www.biola.edu/antonyflew/
For anyone who thinks Flew's move to being a theist is underreported...
I suspect it may not be due to atheistic/materialist bent of most journalists...
it's because of what Flew has to say about Islam, The World Council of Churches,
and communism (see pp 12, 14-16 of the .pdf file).
That, plus Flew's appraisal of St. Paul having a "first-class philosophical mind"
and Christ as a very appealing personage is sufficient for most journalists/editors
to ignore this story!!!
Thanks, and AMEN!
Bears repeating ...........
Catholic Ping - please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
I would rather be a trash collector in Heaven, than on the Board of Directors in Hell. Jus' my opinion.
That's a great way of looking at it. I'll remember that one.
Like the death of Mark Twain, the stories about how Evolution is being reject by scientists have been greatly exagerated.
There and I thought they were ignoring it just because no one knew who the old geezer was.
How it is that a professor at grand old age is so resistant to the wonderful freedom of humility...well, God and Jesus can deal with that.
At 81, he's reached an age at which sexual license probably does not seem so all-important. I've come to think that's about 95% of the motivation behind the modernist revolt against religion, of which atheism is but one strand. The high theorizing is rooted mainly in the desire to reject any authority outside oneself, and this in turn is motivated very largely by the desire to misbehave sexually.
Interesting article....looks like intelligent design is gaining some traction.
You mean reestablishing?
"Although a great many people on FR seem to believe that God doesn't have the power to have created evolution."
"created evolution"? Is that not a bit of an oxymoron?
Bump
You are saying exactly what I have always suspected.
Why? It actually seems more elegant and God is nothing if not elegant.
Why is creative evolution any different than setting a toy boat free in a stream?
Flew believes there is nothing after death which makes his statements even more meaningful.
To Flew there is no eternal spiritual benefit for his belief change. He was just being intellectually honest
And that's the problem. God is NOT irrelevant. Make up a fable of how a log cabin could come into existence without intelligent design. Such a tale would make the builder of the cabin "irrelevant". Unfortunately, since the builder is quite irrelevant, it makes the theory ignoring him irrelevant. Such is the fate of the theory of evolution. IT is irrelevant, not God.
a great many people on FR seem to believe that God doesn't have the power to have created evolution
On the contrary, we believe that God has the power to do as He pleases, including creating the entire universe in 7 days if that's the way it happened. It is the evolutionists who seek to rob God of power, believing that God doesn't have the power to have created the universe without evolution.
They apparently think God put all that evidence out there just to fool us
LOL. Uhm, no. We think God left plenty of evidence, and the evidence points to divine creation, NOT to a chance occurrence wherein He is "irrelevant" as you admit. As these intelluctuals like C.S. Lewis and his recently converted debate partner are concluding, based upon the evidence it is MORE logical to presume intelligent design than to presume evolution. If you want to take a huge leap of "faith" and believe in an evolutionary world in which God is "irrelevant" that is your choice; however, the odds are simply not in your favor.
Like the death of Mark Twain, the stories about how Evolution is being rejected by scientists have been greatly exagerated.
You mean Mark Twain is still alive!? ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.