Kenneth Miller: Respected Christian Champion of Evolution

Maybe due to the truth that there is NO real scientific proof for Evolution as Darwin and his ilk supported, and that God did indeed create all things after their own kind?

 

I could be horribly wrong.

I tend to think of it all as one "animal" DNA-RNA operating system. Code.

Living and dead bit of misnomers, its all atoms and molecules. Quick and Dead prob better words.

Forming man from dust could have been the most "complex" way to describe atoms and molecules at the time.

And the actual forming could involved "evolution" certainly must involve "transmutations".

 

Yes we get it, evangelicals are stupid and dishonest.

 

I also see you have read Zig Zigglars book "How to win friends and influence people" apparently his first chapter says to challenge their intellect and integrity long before you have established a relationship with them. People always like that and are encouraged to engage your wishes more.

 

You have got to be kidding.

 

He seems to spend an inordinate amount of time telling how he has written biased textbooks and how a judge was fooled into ruling against the concept of intelligent design. But all of that proves nothing. Perhaps you could save us some time by highlighting the part where he actually tries to make his case?

 

You do have a winning way with words, don’t you? Your link is to a video, is it not? I saw nothing there to read. The video is over an hour and a half long. Are you suggesting that the parts I referred to are him making his case? I don’t really care who believes what, where, or when, or his view of the politics of it. All I’m interested in is what is true.

The subject is not a heavy interest of mine, but I might accept a bona fide challenge to investigate. However, your response gives the impression you’re just trolling, wanting to waste everyone’s time and toss out insults in the meantime. If you care so little about your own link, why should I care at all?

 

No one here needs to show you anything. You came here, started this thread and then demand people prove to you their intentions. I'd say that is the height of arrogance. Jeesh, and I thought calvies were arrogant.

 

Whatever. Let's take it point by point, honest boy. Post one of your facts and I'll answer.

 

Wow, did this ever miss the mark! As a Hoosier, I can tell you that Notre Dame is very liberal so chances are that Kenneth Miller is liberal, also.

Secondly, belief that God created the earth in six twenty-four hour days six thousand years ago is very much a minority belief among Fundamentalists and Evangelicals. For example, Norman Geisler, who has written about one hundred books, believes in evolution and really the list goes on and on with such people as William Lane Craig.

Thirdly, creationism may have been pushed aside by the Enlightenment but there was always a group of clergy who never accepted it, even in England, and clung to the traditional doctrine of the church for a young earth creation (YEC).

So there really is no ghetto as you charge, although I will pay tribute to Fundamentalists for standing against evolution since their beginning but Evangelicals probably have only a minority who are creationists. And you really cannot prove that the creationist scientists are anything but top notch as they are PhDs just like everyone else. To support evolution, you have to align yourself with atheists and other materialists and naturalists. As for Intelligent Design, it is not necessarily Christian so I am not sure that creationists are disappointed that they lost that battle that you mention about Intelligent Design in the schools.

 

There are no missing links and ID is not the same as YEC.

 

I'm your huckleberry.

 

All of this is beside the point for me. I am well aware of the trial and how it was used to publicly discredit faith in God. I am more interested in the theological motivations behind rejecting intelligent design. Even atheists admit the appearance of purposeful design in nature. Their motivations for arguing against it are strictly theological, not scientific. A Christian arguing against it calls into question his integrity on several levels. One would have to say God is not intelligent, did not create the universe, or is not the source of all nature. If Miller is not a creationist at some level, then he hardly believes in the God of the Bible, much less his Christ (see Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1-3).

 

You represent the majority but Miller is 10 years old and his genetic debate is obsolete and there is no common ancestor. Homology only proves that God used certain attributes over and over.

As one author wrote, if humans have 24 pairs, that would show common ancestry with apes according to Miller, but since humans have 23, Miller says that shows evolution fused ape chromosones.

Miller is a naturalist.

 

I’m confused, are you a fairy or a blueberry?!?