still looking asked:


I recently watched Expelled and was very puzzled at Dawkins’ tone change in his response to the question ‘what if it was designed’. I don’t care how you think it was edited, he wouldn’t change his tone for anyone, especially Ben Stein and Stein could not edit Dawkins ‘tone’, the change in tone was straight from Dawkins. But, if you watch the movie you’ll see that he seems irritated, understandably so, to even be sitting down with Stein and irritated at each question. Which I understand because he doesn’t believe what Stein believes, and that’s fine. But, when Stein asked him to give ‘his’ version of ‘what if’, he became much more pleased (visibly so). Almost like, “Finally, I get to plant the seed”. But this is counter intuitive IF Dawkins is so against the belief of ‘creation’. This is my take on the sudden change of tone…I believe that the reason he became visibly “ok” with being interviewed is because ‘he had been waiting’ for the opportunity to express ‘his’ ideas of how this was all created. Which is a good indication that he knows, in his heart of hearts, this WAS all created and ‘now’ he can get ‘on the record’ proof that (after creation is ‘discovered’ by science, albeit, unintentional) he was smart enough to see what everyone had finally come to accept; that this interview gave him his platform to put on record ‘proof’ that he had figured it out also, and ‘before’ the ‘others’…instead of being left behind by the rest of the world. Science will NEVER be able to prove ‘who/what’ created all of this…but the FACT of creation is coming. The information that exists in the proteins, molecules, cells, etc. can not be accounted for without looking to a creator. This will prove to be the down fall of atheists. The battle will rage on, though, over who or what it was. So, no worries…to those who thrive on it. No agreement will be met, but science will prove this was created…it’s just taking them a LONG time because they don’t like the answer to which the evidence is pointing. Man’s wisdom is foolishness to God. And that’s a very hard pill to swallow for a man full of ‘wisdom’.
what I asked (paraphrased) was “why did he seem HAPPY to answer that question?” he wasn’t happy to say “there is no sky daddy” he was happy to say “IF there was, this is how I see it”. He was happy to answer it. It’s a pyschological question. Why would he be happy to answer such a ’stupid’ question. I gave my thoughts and was hoping to hear some of yours. Not confusion. Not arguments that he’s an atheist…I know that…he knows that…can you give a perspective on his change in tone?
who cares if he was ‘ambushed’ about what the questions were? He’s a grown *** man, he can protect himself against a ’stupid’ man can’t he?…who cares how they editted it? they did NOT and could not edit his tone. I think he became interested in the question because it allowed him to step his foot in the creationist’s room…because he KNOWS it’s coming…and he can’t have people thinking he didn’t see it coming…science is proving it. To say there is no meaning to life is a cop out. There’s meaning and there are consequences. There are laws to our physical side that NO ONE denies and MUST follow…and it makes total sense that there would be laws to our spiritual side. Some might call that Charma, but Charma is a crock, but at least it’s the idea of ‘consequence’.
To Ambivalent Bittern…THAT is what I was hoping to see. It was good to see Dawkins address his visual enjoyment to the question. Thank you for that. I still think he will say “see, I knew that” when this all comes out. but that remains to be seen. I have been looking for some time to find answers to our existence and I try very hard to understand why some are so oppossed to a Creator (God), but it escapes me. Except for direct disobedience. Organized Complexity SCREAMS creator to me, math, laws, good vs evil, compassion. The amount of chance it would take for all this to happen is not something I would put my faith in…But that’s what free will is all about, we get to choose what we put our faith in. That way when we all stand before Him, each of us will have no argument. Silent we’ll stand, finally seeing our Creator. It will be clear. We made our choice.

Sarah

Whatever asked:


Wouldn’t his **** and incestuous relationship classify him as imperfect, thus contradicting the assertion of God being perfect.

Also, knowing this information, how could Jesus possibly be a descendent of David through Joseph, if he wasn’t even born from Joseph’s seed?

I don’t expect any honestly logical explanations from Christians since believing the bible itself is illogical given the common education provided in grammar school establishing science as fact and religion as….well let’s not go there.

Francisco