Joined: April 2008
Earlier, I said:
|If FL truly beleives that evolution is incompatible with Christianity, why not do the obvious thing and abandon Christianity? Because there is a LOT more evidence for evolution than there ever has been for the historical claims of Christianity.|
|Quote (FloydLee @ Sep. 16 2009,03:37)|
Well, you may want to read that paragraph again Dale. What you're writing there--whether I agree with it or not (and I don't)--is actually REINFORCING the truth claim that I'm seeking to defend in this main debate thread: "Evolution is Incompatible with Christianity."
What you're saying there is NOT causing evolution to become compatible with Christianity. Instead you're recommending a course of action (abandonment of Christianity) that apparently assumes that indeed there does exists a real incompatibility somewhere, and that abandoning Christianity is the most rational way (as you see it) to respond to that real incompatibility.
Nice reinforcement of incompatibility there. Also your suggestion that Genesis is "discredited", and that the writers of the Scriptures may be lying, likewise doesn't create any reconciliations between evolution and Christianity.
FL, I merely took your assumptions and followed them to its logical conclusion. And in response, you totally failed to refute my statement that the historical case for Christianity is far weaker than the scientific case for evolution.
I have no problem with people accepting evolution and also being Christians, because I do not assume that all religious people have to be idiotic. And the historical case for the existence of Jesus doesn't even depend on whether or not evolution happens. You, on the other hand, seem to have a lower opinion of most religious people than I do. Ironic, isn't it?
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.