• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

language of God

imaginaryme

imaginaryme

Active Member
Order is just another form of chaos. :D

No, I don't believe that DNA is evidence for creation. It sounds to me like agenda.
 
S

skydivephil

Active Member
Franic Collins, was the head of the government funded human genome project. He is Christian. The previous head was James Watson who won the nObel Prize for the discovery of the structure of DNA. Rated as one of the most important discoveried in history. Hes an atheist.
Francis Collins does not make the case that DNA is evidence for creation, hes a passionate defender of evolution. He makes his case for Christianity on the grounds of fine tuning in the universe and in humans being's spiritual quest.
Nowehere does he say that DNA implies creation, hes a theistic evolutionist through and through.
 
BucephalusBB

BucephalusBB

ABACABB
People and there perfect..
A circle could be perfect.
Choose one of the dimensions and it can be perfect.
Our world can be perfect.

But then, "perfect" alone means actually really nothing.
 
R

ragordon168

Active Member
skydivephil said:
Franic Collins, was the head of the government funded human genome project. He is Christian. The previous head was James Watson who won the nObel Prize for the discovery of the structure of DNA. Rated as one of the most important discoveried in history. Hes an atheist.
Francis Collins does not make the case that DNA is evidence for creation, hes a passionate defender of evolution. He makes his case for Christianity on the grounds of fine tuning in the universe and in humans being's spiritual quest.
Nowehere does he say that DNA implies creation, hes a theistic evolutionist through and through.
Click to expand...

awell i havent actually read it, it was just a topic brough up in a christian/atheist debate as proof of god. when i said that it was just a book not a scientific analysis they used the old 'conspiricy against god' argument which raised a few laughs.
 
S

skydivephil

Active Member
Yes its not a scientific analysis. Collins has done some great science. Not as important as his predecessor James Watson of course. But notice he does not publish his ideas that morality couldn't have evolved in scientific journals. That's a big clue as to how scientific that particular view of his is.
 
G

geofra

Slow, but I get there.
What does the doctor mean by DNA being perfect? Is it physically perfect? Is it perfect in its replication? In its code of instructions?
 
gnostic

gnostic

The Lost One
I don't think any doctor or scientist would use the word "perfect" if they are serious about science, because perfection is subjective description.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top