Kenneth Miller: Respected Christian Champion of Evolution

Of course, but you need to realize that they are Baptists and you are in a Baptist forum. They don’t need to be tolerant of you... you’re their guest and you could be asked to leave at anytime you are persieved as indignant and insulting.

 

Lol. Did that post? I thought I deleted it.

 

LOL... that’s funny.

 

This thread is really unfair to Dr. Miller because the video and the references are ten years old and scientifically obsolete and we do not know if he still holds this obsolete position that the chimp and the human have DNA that is about 98% the same. More recent advanced study of the DNA and genetics has shown the two DNAs are only about 70% or less alike, so the whole theory is scientifically obsolete:

Only 69% of the chimpanzee X chromosome was similar to human and only 43% of the Y chromosome. Chimp autosomal similarity to human on average was 70.7% with a range of 66.1% to 77.9%, depending on the chromosome (Table 1 and Fig. 1). Genome-wide, only 70% of the chimpanzee DNA was similar to human under the most optimal sequence-slice conditions.

Chimpanzees and humans share many localized protein-coding regions of high similarity. However, overall there is extreme DNA sequence discontinuity between the two genomes. The current study along with several other recent reports confirm this. This defies standard evolutionary time-scales and dogmatic presuppositions about a common ancestor.

https://answersingenesis.org/answer...analysis-of-chimpanzee-and-human-chromosomes/

 

My statements were contingent, and are mine alone. I don't speak for all Baptists. Do you believe God created the universe? Does Miller? If so, do you (does he) believe God used intelligence to do so? Or do you (does he) believe God created without design, without intelligence? How you answer these will determine how my comments apply to you and to Miller. If you (if he) believe(s) God created the universe with intelligence and design, then to argue against that in the public arena would be absurd, even hypocritical. How that intelligent designing plays out is a different question, but not one to legislate for or against regarding pet theories. Until every step has been thoroughly established, you cannot simply rule out possibilities because you find them disagreeable. Well, you could, but that would be dishonest, or worse. The vestigial imaginings of evolutionism have not done it proud.

 

The same type of studies state that we and earth worms as 90 % Dna same! I think that life would much in common, especially among the high life forms on earth, as our Creator used a Template in His design of all creatures here...

 

You may want to study up on St. Francis of Assisi. He was always giving things names like Brother Sun, Sister Moon, Brother Wolf, Sister Deer... yada yada. Maybe there is room for Cousin Worm, Sister Slug ...

 

ONLY would count for them if they had received jesus thru faith, trusting in Him alone to save them, not being catholic, water baptized, did good works etc!

 

You seem to juxtapose Creationism with Evolution. Even Christian Darwinists are Creationists. What is it you believe?

Did God create the universe? Did He create man? Was it His plan to create man, or did they just happen because of the properties God infused into his creation? Are men sinners? Did Jesus come to save them? Was Jesus a real man? Did He rise again the 3rd day? etc. etc.

 

For the rest, search YouTube for Dr. David Berlinski. He is one of many scientists, and an atheist, who is open an candid about the actual LACK of consensus concerning Darwinism, despite what Wormy here is asserting.

 

God created Adam as an act of fiat/special direct creation, not by him evolving from primates!

 

There is no real scientific evidence to support evolution, especially in regards to orogin of life, and how humans arrived!

 

I will respond to three things. One, no one discipled Paul. He made it very clear that He was taught directly by Christ Himself, like the other apostles. So, you invoke Paul's name in antithesis of the Trinity in vain.

Two: You presume the scientific community is unified concerning Evolution as if it's too obvious to be denied, and they are not. They are united only in the a priori assumption of Naturalism. There is no need to read Evolution into Genesis 1, and intellectual honesty would compel you to agree with that.

Three: God spoke directly and plainly, and He did so for our salvation. So let your yes be yes, and your no be no. To say yes and then appeal to 'nuance' to mean something else is a lie.

 

There is no real reason to see genesis other than the traditional way as describing liters/historical fashion, as there was a real Adam and Eve, real Fall. Bringing into scriptures this accomodation as accepted facts evolution really makes one call into question just what is to be accepted in Bible as being historical, and what is myth and allogary?

 

I doubt if Miller stands by his comments of 10 years ago since we now know that ape DNA is less than 70% like human DNA. Yes, we have 2 eyes, 2 ears, 1 nose, 1 mouth, etc, but so what? Do you have anything less obsolete?

 

God created a template for creating man and the Apes, why would they not share in arms, legs, nose, eyes etc?

 

Can I help it that the Smithsonian has obsolete information? The DNA correlation is less than 70% according to modern scientific studies. This was linked above several days ago.