Okay, this isn't really a debate but a moderator on a PBS News program. I like Krauss a lot. It saddened me that he did not listen to Behe. Krauss claims that science should be agnostic and unbiased. He said that he thinks Intelligent Design is just a way to get God through the back door of science. This shows that he has a bias, believing that God does not exist. I call it a bias because if God does exist why throw out evidence and an interpretation of that evidence for God and only because there hasn't, in his opinion, been enough peer-reviewed research. Don't you think the ramifications could be profound? Why would you wanna miss out on it? Shutting down the dialogue is not the answer.
Mary Jo Sharp recently debated Tabasn Hussain on the topic of Women in the Bible and the Qur'an. It's interesting to see two women discussing this issue especially since both Christianity and Islam are accused of denigrating women. I loved Dr, Sharp's presentation. She made a great defense for how the Bible sees women. She seemed to be fair to the Muslim's view. Dr. Hussain however misrepresented Genesis 1:26. While you may try to explain "man" as meaning only "male" you have to ignore verse 27 to think that male is more important than female. I also don't think Hussain fairly represented what the Bible teaches about who was responsible for humanity being kicked out of the Eden. The Bible does say that Eve was deceived but like the Qur'an put the responsibility on Adam. I think Hussain also tries to use the New Testament to say that the Christian church tells women to be quiet. I think Hussain's explanation about the passage about dealing with wayward wives does not hold much weight. No where in the Bible does it say its okay to use physical violence on the wife. Hussain employed many tactics that I see Muslims used time and time again. She used non-Christian sources and used men as sources. She even used the Biblical imagery of adultery and prostitution being equated with apostasy to say that the Bible condones rape?!!! However she repudiate honor killings while it is an establish practice non-western muslim countries because the majority of western scholars do not view the Qur'an that way. Why is it okay to argue that way when it helps her and not to argue that way when it helps her? This is part one. I can't wait to see the next part of the debate because I hope to hear some interaction between them. They both raised questions and great points I want to see how they deal with the issues being raised.
This was an interesting video tweeted to me in order to support the idea that the fossil record supports macro evolution. It's shocking to me how many people assume that if you disagree with evolution you don't understand what it is. This video does not present any new information for me but it does try an analogy that I haven't seen used before. The video equates the fossil record to a family photo album. I like the analogy. I also am amazed that at one point it's asserted that "transitional forms" are not animals that are half one thing and half another. Like the fact that we are not expecting there is not going to be a half crocodile and a half duck we can agree on. However later in the video transitional forms are suggested to have been found and cataloged. They are defined as animals that fill in gaps between animals as a common ancestor. Such literature holds that dolphins and hippos have a common ancestor. However they also agree that dolphins and lettuce have a common ancestor if you go back far enough. The analogy in the video is that each ancestor is only slightly different and those differences accumulate to major differences like running on four legs versus swimming. This is why the family album breaks down. All humans on it will only be slightly different and will be human. Does that make sense that there should be nonhuman characteristics represented in the Album without inferring ancestors to fill in the gaps. It's like claiming to be a descendant of Ghengis Khan yet not having a single mongol ancestor.
Mariano has posted an article listing the doxologies in the New Testament pointing Jesus out as God. This is proof that the early Christians did see Jesus as God. Doxologies are the prayers, short hymn of praises, and benedictions pronounced during Christian services. These early Christians would heard these theological points and even memorizing them just as we should today!them.
On February 22, 2010, Dr. James White debated Abdullah al Andalusi on the subject of the Christian and Islamic positions on the nature of God in London. He posted several pictures on his blog post and I hope to be able to see a recording from the debate soon. It's going to be a goodie! Read Dr. White's thoughts regarding the experience at the following link!
Dr, Mariottini has been kind enough to point out some great Greek and Hebrew fonts. I'm real grateful because I'm sure I'm going to be publishing more Greek and Hebrew words as my study in those languages continue.
Okay, this isn't really a debate but a moderator on a PBS News program. I like Krauss a lot. It saddened me that he did not listen to Behe. Krauss claims that science should be agnostic and unbiased. He said that he thinks Intelligent Design is just a way to get God through the back door of science. This shows that he has a bias, believing that God does not exist. I call it a bias because if God does exist why throw out evidence and an interpretation of that evidence for God and only because there hasn't, in his opinion, been enough peer-reviewed research. Don't you think the ramifications could be profound? Why would you wanna miss out on it? Shutting down the dialogue is not the answer. ![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=2f9e23e0-195c-49bd-96b1-a96d05526504)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b08bb0d4-0251-418f-bd45-9445ae0b09d6)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ec3290e9-4fe7-442f-8b3f-3e4d0a364f60)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=111bc39b-ae4a-42a4-a425-dd76b93f951e)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ab2c89d7-ed6b-4728-9ab8-b289e0a8e52a)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=a4acf1c2-cca4-438d-9556-8f8aca22bf03)