Professor John Lennox discusses Christianity, atheism and science

Greg Clarke interviews Professor John Lennox.


No ping yet

  1. Claire Louden says:

    and you are saying that an old dusty book has complete 100% proof of
    everything oh wait don’t forget the hundred loopholes in the first half of
    your magic book

  2. Claire Louden says:

    explain how we are no longer single cell organisms dumbshit

  3. Claire Louden says:

    don’t believe everything from a 2000 year old book with dodgy translation

  4. Johan Sandberg says:

    It’s absolutely and definetly NOT disproven that humans evolved from apes
    the opposite is true we know definetly we DID evolve from apes in fact we
    are still apes today. There are numerous transitional species in the fossil
    record, perhaps you should actually look this up before posting since you
    clearly have no idea what you’re talking about if all you’ve done is read
    fraudulent creationist propaganda, there have been many observations of new
    species evolving from other species today aswell.

  5. stillwill2215 says:

    micro-evolution, which is change within a species is a fact.
    macro-evolution, the belief that apes evolve into men, etc… is
    dis-proven. nothing has ever been observed transitioning from one animal
    into another, and this especially includes the fossil record. men evolve
    into more men, monkeys evolve into more monkeys, but nothing evolves into
    something other than what it was.

  6. User3rror says:

    Room for belief is different than a reason for it.

  7. MrGoatflakes says:

    So a troll it is.

  8. MrGoatflakes says:

    One of the reasons Antony Flew gave was that the church of England changed
    it’s conception of hell. How does that in any way relate to modern biology?
    The arguments he does give that are based on biology are arguments from
    ignorance, which is to say he can’t see how it would happen so it must not
    have happened that way. He should have known better. But we all get old I
    suppose. And you Christians are so good at profiting from peoples moments
    of weakness. Quite sickening really.

  9. MrGoatflakes says:

    It’s Antony Flew

  10. MrGoatflakes says:

    I’m not a mind reader mate. The chain of the comment goes right to the top
    with nary a mention of Anthony Flew, so the reasonable conclusion is that
    he was talking about Lennox. Indeed the thread started with “Lennox sounds
    all good until he starts on evolution”. Was I supposed to guess that this
    Anthony Flew, who I have never heard of, was this great atheist mind
    supposedly turned to theism?

  11. MrGoatflakes says:

    You have to be a troll. No one could be that ignorant and operate a

  12. MrGoatflakes says:

    Yes I misread that. Sorry about getting that wrong and loosing my shit to
    to bullshit over exposure. But you still don’t know what the fuck you are
    talking about, because evolution is falsifiable. This is because is makes
    specific claims about how the world should be if it is correct, like any
    physical theory. Claims which can and have been checked against reality.

  13. SagaciousFrank says:

    ‘Anguspure’ was referring to Anthony Flew, not John Lennox. How about
    getting your facts straight first before making a counterargument.

  14. SagaciousFrank says:

    I never claimed anything of the sort. If you read my post again, you’ll
    realise it does not say what you thought it said.

  15. MrGoatflakes says:

    My dog this guy just is talking out of his arsehole.

  16. MrGoatflakes says:

    LOL Lennox was never an atheist, let alone one of the most influential
    atheists of the 20th century. He has always been a Christian and a vocal
    one at that.

  17. MrGoatflakes says:

    You don’t know what the fuck you are talking about. Seriously. You don’t.
    Evolution says absolutely nothing about a creator.

  18. MrGoatflakes says:

    Except, there really doesn’t. Adding a something begs the even more
    insolvable question of what is behind the something. Saying “it was always
    there” is special pleading and less convincing than saying everything arose
    without a something creating it.

  19. MrGoatflakes says:

    It depends on what you mean by that. If you mean what do we know about how
    things work in a general sense, then probably we are 90% of the way there.
    If you mean, what are all the implications and have we described everything
    extraordinary and surprising that exists in nature, then probably 1% is way
    too high.

  20. MrGoatflakes says:

    “nothing is science is 100% proven” yes, that’s the point. That is how you
    know that you aren’t being had. Anyone that tells you they know something
    100% is lying either to you or themselves. “showing us an animal, and then
    show us the same animal but evolved.” That’s not evolution dude, it’s
    Lamarckism. Well it would be the animal in question could pass it on. No.
    Evolution occurs when the OFFSPRING of an animal differ, & some survive
    better than others. We see this all the time in nature.

  21. Laura Schmidt says:

    I like this guy.

  22. Murri16 says:

    to be honest dude. we probably know far less than 1% of all their is to
    know LOL

  23. lordrazr says:

    @sahadevaaa Math! Evidence! Do some research yourself or do you let people
    like lennox tell you how to think?

  24. Geoff Lillis says:

    He backs Siegfried Scherer, the young earth creationist who gave us the
    “Giant floating forests” explanation of the origins of coal.
    for full details.

  25. Evaldas Butkus says:

    @spacecowboy95 well- be intellectually honest and believe that we, and
    everything around us came by chance and that soon scientists will find out
    something to prove it

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>