Since we are supposedly created in Gods own image, and there is supposedly only one God, I can't wait until we actually do find intelligent life on another planet. Life that looks quite different from us. If there is only one God, then that would mean the aliens would have be either like us, akin to Star Trek, or God would have to be some sort of combined freak to make it true.
Personally, I do believe in God. However, my personal belief is he got the ball rolling, and maybe intervenes here and there (if you do believe in miracles). But mostly things are left to their own devices leaving plenty of room for evolution and God to co-exist. Yes Albert, I'm afraid God does play dice.
By the way, there will never be a "missing link". There will be a couple of species with a bunch of other species in between which look a little more like one species than the other, but the miraculous jump from one species to another will never be seen because it can't happen. Gradual changes (evolution!!) can be seen in birds on Hawaii today (look it up if you dare). Historical evidence of evolution can be seen in DNA. C'mon, chimp DNA is 98.5% the same as human. Unless you think what we see in tests is false.
Religion is another matter entirely. To be frank, religion has nothing to do with God. Some religions involve a God, but some do not. And any religion that deems itself to be the only true religion (Christians,Jews,Muslims, whatever) is destined to be a trouble maker. So I believe in God. But I do not believe in religion since all of them have shown themselves to be capable of murder and general mayhem.
Gary Williamsof PA1:32PM October 30, 2009
Ray wants to insert his superhero - his undesigned designer - into the workings of natural evolution. But Ray clearly doesn't know his history.
So far, natural explanations have a 100% success rate over supernatural explanations for describing how our world works. Never in history has a natural explanation been replaced by a supernatural explanation. Never has a supernatural explanation been supported by actual evidence.
But natural causes have replaced supernatural causes time and time and time again:
The Sun - was a God, now explained by science
The Moon - was a God, now understood by science
The stars - were God, now science
The tides - were attributed to God, now science
The seasons - attributed to God, now science
Earthquakes - were God, now science
Lightning - was God, now science
Rain & drought - was God, now science
Health & disease - was God, now science
Schizophrenia - was demonic possession, now science
Epilepsy - was divine possession, now science
Formation of species - was God, now science (evolution)
Identity & personality - was the soul, now neuroscience
Isaac Asimov said "To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today."
Ray Comfort wants our intellectual surrender and he thrives on ignorance.
RickKof CT1:20PM October 30, 2009
"The Introduction also defines an atheist as someone who believes that nothing created everything"
Wrong! So glad he decided to group all Atheists into one sterotype based his narrow minded Theist's view.
Jack a$$!
Robof FL1:20PM October 30, 2009
And Darwinism is as nebulous as a puffy cloud on a hot windy day, forever moving, changing, and expanding—because its bounds are limited only by the fertile human imagination.
Switch the word 'Darwinism' with the word 'Christianity' (or 'religion', for that matter), and you get the REAL truth.
This is true of so much of Ray's stuff. Turn it around it gets closer to the truth.
Kameronof TX1:09PM October 30, 2009
Ray Comfort is clearly cashing in on -- and ridiculing -- the hard work of Charles Darwin to create a piece of garbage to support his own religious beliefs. The only reason the press is covering this is because it so loves a controversy.
Is this "US News & World Report" or the latest MSM waste of bandwidth?
Stop covering crap like this and give us the REAL news.
Mariaof AZ1:06PM October 30, 2009
I'm not sure how Ray thinks Darwin invented a time machine, but Christians have been killing Jews for over a thousand years. In fact, Spanish Christians murdered about the same percentage of Jews in Spain (before expelling them in 1492) as Hitler did in Europe. So, unless Darwin was around in the 15th century, Ray has some explaining to do.
The document "Dabru Emet" written and signed by 200 rabbis and Jewish historians states that, although Christianity did not CAUSE the shoah, without the existence of Christian antisemitism, the shoah could never have happened.
As to 'blacks being closer to gorillas than humans', perhaps Comfort should look at Rwanda. Creationism, according to the book by Gourevitch, played a prominent role in the murder of 800,000 people there. And this was in 1994.
In 2000 years of existence, creationism has never explained a single feature of nature. It has ALWAYS failed. It has a perfect track record of failure in explaining nature.
Its role in the creation of genocide, however, is a relative success.
Bob Puharicof PA12:57PM October 30, 2009
It's called lying by omission and by false implication, Raytard.
One should really wonder why Ray--and every other pseudoscientist out there--can't make an honest case against evolution and Darwin, instead having to utilize fallacies, strawmen, and misdirection.
What do they have to lose from being honest, except their entire edifice of pseudoscience?
Glen Davidson
tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Glen Davidsonof WA12:50PM October 30, 2009
>If life on this planet did evolve from a single cell, who or what created that cell?
An excellent question and one that evolution does not answer because evolution isn't about beginnings, more about the journey.
No one knows the answer to that question but we do know that the creation myth described in the Bible (and many other sources) is so inaccurate that it can be safely dismissed as apocryphal.
As for the rest of your post, yes it takes certain conditions for life, as we know it, to thrive, we are very lucky to be here.
It may very well be that life occurs in the universe wherever the conditions are right so it's not unlikely that there is life on Earth but inevitable.
I suggest you read up on the subject of "Intelligent Design" from science's point of view. You will learn that there isn't anything intelligent about how life is "designed", in fact everything from our head to our little toes are so rife with flaws, half-measures and compromises that our "designer" could only be called incompetent. Wisdom teeth, appendixes and an upside down drainage system are just a few of the many "good enough" errors that evolution left us with.
salvage12:44PM October 30, 2009
It is hard to imagine where to start, but I will wait for Ms. Scott to handle the high points. Ray loves his rhetoric, but feels no need to have any firm understanding of anything he tosses lightly away.
He has been shown over and over again to be completely wrong in his thinking, if I may be so generous to call it that. This showing shows no sign of making it into his consciousness as a force for understanding however.
JackCof NY12:35PM October 30, 2009
Thank you, Dan, for bringing forward this debate. We who recognize design in nature are not afraid of where it will lead.
I wonder how it is that some folks can see a camera, a house, or an airplane and recognize that each was designed by a being with more intelligence than the camera, house, or airplane - yet they see an oak tree, a hummingbird, or a person and fail to see that each was designed by a being with more intelligence than the tree, bird, or person.
Psychologists tell us that bullies are at heart cowards and that they bully out of fear. There must be great fear behind the bullying of the "something from nothing and molecule to man" evolutionists. Yet we must try to be kind to these folks no matter their invective - some of which is shown in the responses to this debate. You know, "Love your enemies."
As Thomas Jefferson, himself a scientist and a Deist, wrote, "We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it." We who recognize that the design in nature implies a Designer are not afraid of this debate, and I appreciate your willingness to have it despite the bullies who would shut it down.
Reader Comments
Back to blog
Gary Williams of PA 1:32PM October 30, 2009
RickK of CT 1:20PM October 30, 2009
Rob of FL 1:20PM October 30, 2009
Kameron of TX 1:09PM October 30, 2009
Maria of AZ 1:06PM October 30, 2009
Bob Puharic of PA 12:57PM October 30, 2009
Glen Davidson of WA 12:50PM October 30, 2009
salvage 12:44PM October 30, 2009
JackC of NY 12:35PM October 30, 2009
Michael of ME 12:34PM October 30, 2009