[3 of 7] Isn’t Theism Merely Replacing One Mystery With Another? John Lennox at UPenn
[3 of 7] Isn’t Theism Merely Replacing One Mystery with Another? John Lennox at UPenn – http://www.veritas.org/talks – Belief in God seems to just push back the really important questions one step. Doesn’t theism prevent a robust intellectual cu…
Cover Story Lane Heaps, Burned Out Cop Page 1
Filed under: willard drug treatment program
Although Heaps, then an undercover vice detective, was neither the lead nor the senior officer on the attempted arrest, he was the one who led the assault after the drug dealer had fled from an undercover female officer in the middle of a drug deal …
Read more on Salt Lake City Weekly
KILLING US SOFTLY
Filed under: willard drug treatment program
This is not surprising since Dr. Emanuel is a fellow at the Hastings Center … the same Hastings Center co-founded by the euthanasia proponent, Willard Gaylin, MD … the same Hastings Center whose other co-founder, Daniel Callahan, explained in 1983 …
Read more on NewsWithViews.com
8 Responses to [3 of 7] Isn’t Theism Merely Replacing One Mystery With Another? John Lennox at UPenn
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I like how the Atheists/Logic/Freethinkers watch these videos but then act stunned when God is the central point. You KNOW that his basis is going to be that God exists in the first place. Seriously? Just shows me that secretly inside your checking to see if this GOD thing has any legs? vs what you’ve picked to be true. I think its cool that your searching for answers. Why else would you be here? It’s cool that your confused.
Wow your a bright one! One of the leading Christian apologists does believe in God? in fact! Well done for making the correct assumption!
This video doesn’t assume anything – it’s a? stretch of code in some drive that Youtube owns. It’s 1/7th of an entire? discussion wherein John Lennox assumes God exists.
Macro evolution has never been observed or proven. It is a leap of faith from micro, which is natural selection in its true form – selecting from that? which is already there, to keep a kind alive, but it never produces a new offspring.
Believing in the theory of evolution has many times been a hindrance to objectively looking at a result, and is not needed to study the world.
DNA is not an illusion and prominent atheists have converted to saying there must be a god, studying this in depth.
You are? right my friend, one does not advance in treating disease by believing in the unprovable theory of evolution through the scientific method. You confuse or try to throw in macro+ evolution with variations within a kind. In other words, all kinds have the information within to adapt to a situation to an extent. Everyone knows that. And if you want to call it evolution, it is micro-evolution (variations within a kind), not macro – going from one kind of animal to another.
nemirn removed his own comment, so I will add it here to reply to it afterwards. nemirns said:
“You’re right!!! Evolution has nothing to do with advances in treating disease. Disease-causing organisms don’t actually change; studying the “evilution” of drug resistance is stupid! We will never understand the roots of? genetic diseases because DNA is an illusion!!!
The case studies in this section illuminate how evolutionary approaches can make a difference in the world of medicine.”
No,? it does not take much time and effort to understand the “scientific method”. It´s clear as day – it´s about being able to test, observe, being able to measure, empirical. It´s quite easy my friend, and I hope you understand it one day.
Reason is? good, and if you follow it, will not only take you out of this idiocy and deceit you are writing in, but ultimately, home to God.