Posted on 09/11/2008 9:55:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Sept 10, 2008 — Astrobiologist David Deamer believes that life can spontaneously emerge without design, but he thinks lay people are too uneducated to understand how this is possible, so he gives them the watered-down version of Darwin’s natural selection instead, which he knows is inadequate to explain the complexity of life. That’s what he seemed to be telling reporter Susan Mazur in an interview for the Scoop (New Zealand). Is the lay public really too dense for the deeper knowledge of how evolution works?...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Behe is a godless evolutionist that wants to teach our school children that God is dead and that man evolved over millions of years by common descent (man is related to monkey).
I have repeated this post but you continually tout Behe as your expert! Why don't you address this issue?
You should probably try to gain a little insight into the scientific discussion before you try to use an avowed evolutionist that says the ToE is an "elegant design" to try to discredit evolution.
Are you publishing yet?
Displays of strength and aggressiveness do play a role, but the effect over time of aggressive and dangerous behavior is negative toward spreading genes. Girls are turned on by danger, sure, but that can encourage men to take themselves out of the gene pool (like the Jackass movie and such). Like I said, even a big brawny guy that appears to have a clear edge in a street fight can get cut down quick with a bullet, or with a gang of less fit individuals. That's why most of that strength and aggression is displayed in boardrooms now. The sales guy who makes $300,000 because he's an alpha male gets a ton of women, if that's what he's after. Interestingly, that sales guy is more likely to wear a condom every time, or have only a few kids when he does settle down.
Christianity follows Christ. I’m pretty sure He didn’t advocate burning anybody at the stake.
You are defining fighting and aggression too narrowly. Most displays of strength do not involve killing or seriously injuring members of one’s one species.
Nevertheless, risk taking is not automatically disfavored.
My only point, if you recall where this started.
As a Christian, I believe the New Testament supercedes the Old.
The Pope wrote the New Testament? Now this is news!
Besides this Revelation, there’s simply nothing in the New Testament, let alone Jesus teaching anything other than loving one’s enemies.
I don't understand how 'the word of God' written later can supercede 'the word of God'?
Not all, and I went to a Christian college initially.
But I later attended a State school in N.Y. (And 3 other colleges between and after those, while I was in the USAF)
What a huge difference.
Interestingly, at the 1st school no science professors bent over backwwards to inject their religious beliefs in ANY class other than philosophy class, but at the NY school I had not only science professors, but also an anthropology professor, a language professor and others that made no secret of their atheism.
Then I don’t get it. First you say that they’re telling everyone that all scientists are Darwinists/atheits and then you say that’s not the case at all.
Who do you think put the New Testament together? But you are right, I don't think Constantine was even Baptized at the time he Canonized the Bible so how could he be the Pope?
Besides this Revelation, there’s simply nothing in the New Testament, let alone Jesus teaching anything other than loving one’s enemies.
I won't try and dispute you today : ) Never the less, those were pretty interesting times back then.
Did the professors at the '1st school keep their belief in God secret?
We are under a new covenant. God’s ways of dealing with mankind have changed even though God Himself hasn’t.
But if you don’t understand that, you clearly are unfamiliar with the teachings of Christ and have not read much of the NT.
Why did God feel he had to change his methods? The old ones weren't working?
But if you don’t understand that, you clearly are unfamiliar with the teachings of Christ and have not read much of the NT.
I understand the Bible's transition in how man views of the Gods changed.
Said MrJesse:So the question is "If we had a normal sundial and a special sundial that read actual gravitational position of the sun, would the two read 2.1 degrees apart at any given instant." (LeGrande and I agreed for the sake of our discussion that the gravity was an accurate indicator of the actual direction.)No.
What? Living under mercy, grace, and forgiveness isn't good enough for you? You disapprove of that?
You'd rather be living under the OT Law?
God isn't allowed to change His mind?
God doesn’t change his character, and showed forgiveness by coming down Himself to take on all the sin of the world for those who simply accept that gift. This is the new covenant.
OT law had a bunch of stuff that was useful at the time, for health reasons, that didn’t apply as sanitation improved.
I don't know what F said. I was only responding to one particular statement that you said. If you want my opionion on something F said, please post that to me. Don't go off saying I agree with something I haven't evene seen.
God didn't change. Man's view of him changed.
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.