"A key doctrine in my own faith is that Jesus was born of a virgin , even though it makes no scientific sense - there is the matter of Jesus 's Y-chromosome to account for . But that is the point . Miracles , by definition , do not have to make scientific sense . They are specific acts of God , designed in most cases to get a message across . Their very rarity is what makes them remarkable . An atheist , of course , will argue that miracles are bogus and are stitched together from the needs and desires of human imagination . Maybe so . To a believer , miracles are more than `` violations of the laws of nature , `` as they were described by David Hume . They reflect a greater reality , a spiritual reality , and they occur in a context that makes religious , not scientific , sense . To the nonbeliever , there is no spiritual reality , and hence there are no miracles . To a person of faith , miracles display the greater purposes of God , giving them a meaning that transcends physical reality . If this is true , why should n't we allow that the creation of our species was a miracle ? Or why not agree that the sudden explosion of life in the Cambrian era might have been a miracle ? Both might have been . In 1900 , we could easily have said that the sun 's fire was a miracle . Unable to explain the biological basis of immunity , we could have chalked that up to God , too . And for good measure we could have told our students that the interior heat of the earth might be the work of the devil . We are now far enough along in the development of science to appreciate that its track record suggests that ultimately it will find natural causes for natural phenomena ."
"But wait a minute ! Has n't science found that it 's scientifically impossible for Jesus to be born of a virgin - no Y-chromosome ? Why is he willing to forfeit science and accept the Bible in that regard , and forfeit the Bible in so many other respects ? Why is it okay for him to accept the virgin birth of Christ , and riducule anyone who believes in the creation of the first man , Adam ? If God could handle the Y-chromosome , could n't God also handle creating the first , fully formed man ? He calls Adam `` fictional `` on page 5 . It becomes more and more clear why atheists are comfortable with theistic evolution . If there was no Adam , there was no original sin , and no genealogy as described in the book of Genesis , only monkeys . Except for his amazing exception to science in the virgin birth of Jesus , he seems to allow evolutionistic pronouncements to have priority over Biblical statements . Then ALL the basics of Christianity , the nature of God and central New Testament teachings , including the way the sinner Adam ( one man ) and the Savior Jesus ( one man ) are linked together in Romans 5 , 16-18 , are trivialized just the way atheists love . No wonder they 're so comfortable with theistic evolution ! On the bottom of page 235 , Miller 's comment about `` just about any preacher I have had the patience to listen too ..... `` speaks volumes - his cluelessness about original sin and many other things about Christianity shows he has n't had patience to listen to too many . But patience does n't seem to be a factor when it comes to his enthusiasm for Darwin 's works . He finishes the book with `` What kind of God do I believe in ? The answer is in these words . I believe in Darwin 's God. `` Sorry folks . It 's going to take more than a herd of angry atheists to convince me that he 's anything but a phony . I hope this thread gets some civilized responses ."
"A key doctrine in my own faith is that Jesus was born of a virgin"
"Has n't science found that it 's scientifically impossible for Jesus to be born of a virgin"