February 11th, 2013
The following originally appeared in The New York Times by Jennifer Schuessler.
In 1974 Thomas Nagel published “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?,” a short essay arguing that the subjective experience of consciousness — what philosophers call the “qualia” — could not be fully reduced to the physical aspects of the brain.
That essay framed a landmark challenge to the materialist view of the mind that was then prevailing and helped cement Mr. Nagel’s reputation as one of the most incisive and imaginative of contemporary philosophers.
But since the late October release of his latest book, “Mind and Cosmos,” reviewers have given Mr. Nagel ample cause to ponder another question: What is it like to be an eminent (and avowedly atheist) philosopher accused of giving aid and comfort to creationist enemies of science?
Advocates of intelligent design have certainly been enthusiastic, with the Discovery Institute crowing about Mr. Nagel’s supposed “deconversion” from Darwinism. The book, subtitled “Why the Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False,” has also drawn appreciative notice from conservative publications that might normally disdainMr. Nagel’s liberal writings in moral and political philosophy.
The response from scientists and most of his fellow philosophers, however, has ranged from deeply skeptical to scorching.
read more »
July 11th, 2012
With the recent discovery of a new boson, which is likely to be the elusive Higgs boson, the standard model for particle physics would not be complete. Keep in mind that this only confirms the model that has been used for a long time now. This explains the early moments after the big bang where there was the electroweak force which separated and became the electromagnetic and weak nuclear forces (there’s also the strong nuclear force). This doesn’t unify the theory of gravity. Physicists must still develop a theory of quantum gravity.
read more »
July 8th, 2012
Reblogged from Chuck Norris.
[F]or too many years I was in rebellion to God. Now I’m a rebel with a cause for God and for grass-roots America.
I no longer fit the mold. I’m not a liberal actor from Hollywood. I’m not politically correct, in my opinions or my practice. And though I’m concerned with what people think, I will not compromise the truth in any form to cater to others, even with religion and politics.
Those who would merely brand me on ”the right” are oversimplifying and running from the real issue. I’m not the issue! None of us are. Jesus is, especially during Christmas.
And the question He asked the people of His day still needs to be answered by those in ours: ”Who do people say that I am?”
read more »
June 22nd, 2012
There are primarily six passages in the Bible that concern the issue of homosexuality. In Leviticus 18.22 it says that it is an abomination for a man to lie with another man as with a woman. In Lev. 20.13 the death penalty is prescribed in Israel for such an act, along with adultery, incest, and bestiality. In Gen. 19 Sodom is destroyed for their homosexuality and wickedness.
In I Cor. 6.9-10 Paul writes, “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the Kingdom of God.” The words in the list translated “men who practice homosexuality” refer in Greek literature to the passive and the active partners in male homosexual intercourse. In I Tim. 1.10 along with fornicators, slave traders, liars, and murderers as “contrary to the sound teaching of the Gospel.” In Rom. 1.24-28 Paul states,
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
read more »
June 13th, 2012
For a greater context and understanding of the current discussion please be sure to read Alvin Plantinga’s most recent book, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion and Naturalism. It was published in December of 2009 but I qualified for an early release, I don’t know how, and received my copy November 1st of that year. I finished reading it within a week.
Within the last week or so there has been a lot of discussion between Plantinga, Jay Richards, and William Lane Craig. I recently did a post sharing Plantinga’s response to Jay Richards. The heart of the conflict is defining the terms, primarily ‘Darwinism.’ I don’t really disagree with what everyone is saying on their own terms but I would agree with Jay, that Plantinga and Craig are not using Darwinism in the correct sense. Plantinga uses the randomness in Darwinism, in a theistic context, to me compatible with guidance.
Jay also sent a Question of the Week to Craig concerning the same thing. Be sure to read Jay’s full question but here’s Craig’s response:
Thanks for these trenchant comments, Jay! Lest distressed readers miss the forest for the trees, we agree on the central point: that insofar as a person claims that the evidence of evolutionary biology has shown that the evolutionary process, based as it is on genetic mutations and natural selection, is undirected, purposeless, or non-teleological, he is making a claim that hopelessly outstrips the scientific evidence and so is unjustified.
read more »
May 29th, 2012
Reblogged from Casey Luskin with Evolution News and Views.
Unfortunately most public schools do NOT teach about the flaws in evolutionary theory. Instead, they censor this information, hiding from students all of the science that challenges Darwinian evolution. But in a perfect world, if the evidence against Darwinian theory were taught, these would be my top three choices:
- (1) Tell students that the fossil record often lacks transitional forms and that there are “explosions” of new life forms, a pattern of radiations that challenges Darwinian evolutionary theory
- (2) Tell students that many scientists have challenged the ability of random mutation and natural selection to produce complex biological features
- (3) Tell students that many lines of evidence for Darwinian evolution and common descent are weak:
May 18th, 2012
Wallace: There are seven manuscripts that have been discovered in the last few months (May 2012). They are all papyri from the gospels and Paul’s letters (including Hebrews because that’s how the manuscripts treat them.) These seven manuscripts are all either second century, one probably first century, and two maybe third century… What’s remarkable is there’s a Luke fragment that is probably first half of the second century, which is coequal with the oldest known manuscript, P52, which is John… Keep watching!
April 24th, 2012
I’m sure most of you are aware of the controversy several students in the student body have raised concerning Liberty’s selection of Mitt Romney as the Commencement speaker this year. This controversy has even been picked up by the Religion blog at CNN. (Previous notables like Ben Stein, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, and Ted Kennedy have spoken on campus before and were not Evangelicals). I’m not commenting on anything about the situation other than I simply don’t care if Romney speaks or not. Jerry sent out an email to the student body today and here’s what it says:
read more »