[L,TOWM]

My understanding of where these arguments usually go is:

1) General agreement in biological micro-evolution,
2) Vehement flame wars concerning the theory of macro evolution, particularly in the origin of man question, generally in speciation, and
3) An Atheist-Christian food fight over the existence of God, the inerrancy of scripture, and the incompatibillity of any naturalism with religious faith...

Bleccch.

I reject that framework. I have been flamed by both sides of this issue. I know little of either physics or theology, but the realities discussed in scientific papers and scripture often differ only in the terms used and the depth of discussion.

It seemed to me from the post that I was responding to, that a singular, unique event was being classified as an "everyday phenomena". Incorrect. If a singular, unique, and glorious event cannot be called be a miracle, then what in His name can be? Or, what in nothing's name can be? (If you go that way...)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

1) General agreement in biological micro-evolution,

2) Vehement flame wars concerning the theory of macro evolution, particularly in the origin of man question, generally in speciation, and

3) An Atheist-Christian food fight over the existence of God, the inerrancy of scripture, and the incompatibillity of any naturalism with religious faith...

And I'll add,

4) Christian infighting over whether their particular brand of Christianity allows for the compatibility of the Bible with science.

Don't want to leave anybody out.