Hold it right there! That one is too preciously …

Comment on Elliot Sober: Just Don’t Call the Designer “God” by wesley kime.

Hold it right there! That one is too preciously ironic to be allowed to slip without ado into the blogmire – I mean Ken’s July 24 quote from Edwards that, in essence, “only atheistic doctors [not even theistic evolutionary doctors] are able to refuse to see disease as a random process and not as a curse from God.” The irony is that such “God’s curse” business would be directed to Dr. Pitman, of all people, of all doctors. He’s as highly trained and scientific, as in command of intricate and consummate knowledge of molecular anatomy, physiology, and pathology, and as smart as they come. Beyond that, he’s a graduate of the one medical school on the planet that was founded by an unashamedly Biblically inspired religious organization to unashamedly follow Christ’s example of expending, when He was here on earth, more time and power healing than preaching, or cursing, He having created mankind in the first place. And a medical school increasingly known for the quality of its research as guided by the certainty that human metabolism, and human pathology, and human immunology, human defenses against disease, if explored deeply enough, are intelligent, not random, research reported in the most respected — and peer-reviewed — medical journals. That’s the irony. Alas, one man’s irony is another man’s pothole.

wesley kime Also Commented

Elliot Sober: Just Don’t Call the Designer “God”
Enough of this! Faith is not being denied. Faith for absolutely no reason is. Such is not faith, it’s gullibility; it is not holy, it is absurd, and dangerous.

Recent Comments by wesley kime

Brilliant and Beautiful, but Wrong
Brilliant, beautiful, and so right! Speaking of your presentation at LLU recently. Great to see you and your family (especially my namesake, Wes. God bless! WK

Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Bob Helm: Dr. Sanford is very familiar to most of us. He was invited to speak at LLU several years ago and I and a great many were privileged to hear him.

Evolution from Space?
Hats off yet again to Sean for pursuing this topic as a scientist should, no nonsense, and in it’s proper setting — as a revival of one of the ancient ideas recently upgraded as a desperate alternative to the increasingly compelling intelligent design data. I had occasion to review panspermia a few years ago and as is my wont I found it more amusing than scientific. If you would like what was intended to be a satirical response to panspermia and other related curiosities you could check out: http://www.iessaythere.com/black-hole-humor.html
Meantime, Sean’s article is of far more cogent worth.

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
As he has done on this site many times, Sean in his line-by-line-item response to C. White (not EG or EB) has, to my mind, clearly enunciated the issue and resolution.

When all the hermeneutics, quoting, and arguing and inordinately judgmental riposte are over, it comes down, as I understand it, to two things: 1) Whether the 7th day Sabbath (whether enunciated in the famous 10 commandments or otherwise) is still valid, and 2) Does the grace obtained by the vicarious sacrifice by the shedding of Christ’s blood or other divine process too deep for us to understand in this life, cover every sin automatically and without ado, altogether passively on our part, or is it only on condition that we first totally and deeply accept it? Other details always hassled forever are distractions.

I accept that I must accept it, wholly, actively, even with agony, with my whole being.

Nobel Prize Winner “Blinded by Belief”: Retracts 2016 Paper on RNA Self-Replication
The confession that Szostak made is boggling! If anybody has been on a “journey”, Szostak has! And this analysis by Sean of that journey and its implications is truly awesome. It should be published widely… I’m surprised nobody has commented on it yet. No comment could do it justice.

I’m reduced to being simply curious. Was there talk of rescinding Szostak’s Nobel? I propose another Nobel category: a prize for most honest scientist, and Szostak would be the first winner. Few other scientists would be eligible, particularly among evolutionary scientists, who collectively seem to have suffered a blindness mutation. He should be TIME’s Man of the Year.