Replies

I don't really mind that theistic evolutionists get their notions from "reading" nature. If that's what they say, then fine. That's where they get it.

They just don't get it from reading the bible which is the foundation of the Christian faith.

Since theistic evolution can only be read from "nature," then we are not dealing with the God revealed in the Bible. We are dealing with some other god who hangs around a long time in his laboratory prodding living things in certain directions.

He must be long-lived, wouldn't you think? Or is he a series of beings who hand down this herding/breeding task on their own demise? But.....I speculate......don't I?

"I don't really mind that theistic evolutionists get their notions from "reading" nature. If that's what they say, then fine. That's where they get it.

They just don't get it from reading the bible which is the foundation of the Christian faith."

But the Bible is demonstrably wrong on a number of scientific matters (age of earth, claiming Noah's Ark could have possibly held all the species of animals (or even a tiny proportion of them), the genetic bottleneck that would have resulted even if the Ark could have held 2 of each *kind*, the impossibility genetically of all humans having been descendant of just 2 people (or of 8 after the flood) and so on.) There simply is no other choice for a Christian ; either you reject the clear evidence that exists from the physical world, or you adjust your understanding and interpretation of the Bible.

Again, this is all irrelevant to the point I made. Christianity isn't the definition of theism; theism does not require a sacred text.
Evolution isn't atheism, and you have not even come close in demonstrating it is.

Since theistic evolution can only be read from "nature," then we are not dealing with the God revealed in the Bible.

...we are dealing with the God revealed by reality.

Most believers in the Bible prefer to reconcile the two, under the assumption that the one described in the Bible is the same one as the God that matches reality.

You, however, denounce this as a "fallacy".

Others prefer to simply reject reality if it contradicts *their* personal reading of what they think the Bible is saying. For example:

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record,"
-- AnsersInGenesis, Statement of Belief

There's a word for people who deny reality when it contradicts their personal beliefs...