For those who are interested, the mp3s of my last 3 appearances on Jim Babka's radio show are available for download. I did three consecutive shows, each on the subject of intelligent design, evolution and religion. Here are the links:
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I just got a call from Jim Babka inviting me on his show for a second time this Sunday. The subject will be the 14th amendment and whether or not it intended to incorporate the bill of rights as enforcable against the states. My opponent will be none other than Herb Titus, former dean of the Regent…
I got some good news yesterday. My old friend Troy Britain, who I've known since the old days of the Compuserve religion forum (back when it had to be accessed with proprietary software dialing in to their system rather than through the internet, which I did on a 286 with 1 meg of ram!), informed…
I have written extensively in the past about the 14th amendment and the doctrine of incorporation. I'm still baffled by those who take the position that the 14th amendment did not make the Bill of Rights enforceable against the states. The historical evidence against that position is very strong. I…
It appears that I will be a guest on the Jim Babka show again tonight. He has asked me to come on along with Herb Titus again, this time to discuss the Supreme Court's Kelo decision the other day. I'll be curious to hear what position Titus takes. On the one hand, I know that he is a staunch…
I think you do an excellent job, very good at thinking on your feet and providing sources for the claims you make. I just wish he had allowed more time for you to talk! And in the time he does give you to talk, it's kind of annoying that he asks you to explain the difference between methodological and philosophical naturalism three times. Sure seems like the time could have been more productively spent.
Ed,
At the end of the third interview, Jim Babka mentions "three or four traps" that Philip Johnson told him to throw your way. Any idea what these "traps" were?
dogscratcher wrote:
Not specifically, no. Apparently he got the idea from Johnson's essay at the end of Portraits of Creation. Johnson evidently says in his essay that when we evilutionists say that we think evolution and religion are compatible we don't really mean it and there are ways to trap us into admitting it. That's the way Jim described it to me after the show ended, but I don't know specifically what he meant or what the traps were. None of the quotes from Johnson seemed at all difficult to answer to me.
Whatever the traps were, you handled them very smoothly and professionally. The way Babka said it, it sounded like he had actually spoken to Johnson. Thanks for the clarification, DS