David:
I'll take a pass on the ad-homs in your post as they simply illustrate what
I've said concerning you all along. You're an insular, rationalism-based,
anthropolically centered, angry, fundamentalist-based, sectarian. Ooops! I
didn't 'take a pass' did I?
I've but one name to give to you and this so-called grief stricken student.
Alister McGrath. Both of you do your homework so that you might see just how
wrong you are. (Bonus name: Thomas Weinandy).
Go to it guys!
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org>
Sent: March 22, 2006 08:39
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Williams on Creationism
David Miller wrote:
I hate it when theologians are embarrassed
of giving glory to the Creator in school.
Lance wrote:
You do KNOW, do you not David, that
that's NOT the source of his embarrassment?
Rowan Williams is not embarrassed concerning
our Lord ANYWHERE. He, not unlike many,
are embarrassed over believers turning
non-issues into 'issues'. (i.e. creationISM)
There is more to this issue that this. Is he embarrassed of certain
brands
of creationism? Of course. I am too. I'm embarrassed of Henry Morris
and
that whole ICR group over there. At the same time, they serve a purpose
in
what they do, and we should not revolt to them so much that we accept the
atheistic and scientific agenda of removing all references to the Creator
from our public schools.
You say it is a NON-ISSUE? I consider such a statement ignorant in the
extreme. Deceptive to the core. There is one thing that the ICR group
has
illustrated, and that is that this is an issue.
I talked with a student a few months ago, John Boyles, just before he was
elected to be President of Student Government at the University of
Florida.
I talked with him about the persecution my daughter is undergoing at UF
just
because she believes the Bible that homosexual behavior is sinful. He
confided to me that he applied for a Rhodes scholarship to study theology
at
Oxford. He was turned down because he argued in his oral examination /
interview that the idea of Intelligent Design should be considered in the
classroom. If this was a non-issue, these professors of theology would
have
tolerated his creationist convictions. I wish I could convey to you the
grief this man carried over his own religious persecution by those who
would
not have him study theology because he believed intelligent design
theories
should be considered in school.
I truly believe that these modern theologians assume that scientists are
well studied in origins and are deeply convicted about the truth of
evolutionary processes and the absurdity of the teaching of Genesis. When
the truth comes out, they will be the ones who will be greatly embarrassed
in the day of our Lord. The philosopher Thomas Khun was right in how he
depicted the way science really operates. These theologians who object to
Creationist models of origins should pay attention to him just a little
bit
more.
David Miller
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may
know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6)
http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a
friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
