Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: aMorePerfectUnion
Well met. I´ve never encountered an atheist with a good understanding of science either. Not to say there aren´t any. But science is a
good place to start in discussions of God.
88 posted on 05/01/2011 6:50:14 PM PDT by onedoug (If)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: onedoug

onedoug,
thanks. I agree with your comments about science.
best,
ampu


90 posted on 05/01/2011 7:55:34 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]

To: onedoug

(The US Constitution is based on God and moral absolutes that have been ripped apart by the atheists and pagan and occultists. Schools are brainwashing children into Darwinism and atheism and Marxism.)

“Antony Flew, the 81-year-old British philosophy professor who taught at Oxford and other leading universities, became an atheist at age 15. Throughout his long career he argued—including in debates with an atheist-turned-Christian named C. S. Lewis—that there was a “presumption of atheism,” that is, the existence of a creator could not be proved.

But he’s now been forced to face the evidence. It comes from the Intelligent Design movement, led by Dr. Phillip Johnson and particularly the work of Michael Behe, the Lehigh biochemist who has proven the “irreducible complexity” of the human cell structure. Though eighty-one years old, Flew has not let his thinking fossilize, but has faithfully followed his own dictum to “go where the evidence leads.”

Christian philosophy professor Gary Habermas of Liberty University conducted an interview with Flew that will be published in the winter issue of Philosophia Christi, the journal of the Evangelical Philosophical Society and Biola University. Flew told Habermas that a pivotal point in his thinking was when he realized two major flaws in the various theories of how nature might have created itself. First, he recognized that evolutionary theory has no reasonable explanation for “the first emergence of living from non-living matter”—that is, the origin of life. Second, even if a living cell or primitive animal had somehow assembled itself from non-living chemicals, he reasoned it would have no ability to reproduce.”

From: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/01/antony-flews-co-1.html


91 posted on 05/01/2011 9:16:27 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson