[Ichneumon]

The INHERENT (please look up that word, Evos) argument of Darwin's hypothesis is that the species evolved from lower life forms.

And why couldn't this be the manner in which God created mankind?

As this negates the idea of the Soul,

Wrong.

of the conscience,

Wrong again.

of the moral comport of Mankind

Wrong yet again. Why do you presume that these are incopatible with evolutionary formation of mankind?

as well as dishes entirely the Biblical descriptions of how and why Man was created,

Are you sure? Millions of Christians have no problem reconciling the two.

Darwin's hypothesis of Evolution in the early 19th century negates the Biblical model.

Nope.

Don't know how to say it any clearer

Well, you could make it more clear by actually supporting your assertions, if you can...

except if it didn't nail the Bible, this thread would not be this long.

No, if it didn't "nail the Bible in the minds of *some* people", it wouldn't be as long -- that has little to do with whether it *actually* conflicts with the Bible when the Bible is read correctly.

Our spiritual nature is something that did not "evolve" out of physical processes. Sorry.

Because you say so? That's not very convincing. \

[Californiajones]

Hey, I'll be happy to show you point for point how Evolution contradicts the Bible, except that it would probably be as long as the Bible itself.

So why don't you read it for yourself. Most 19th Century Victorians were well versed in the Bible, as it was warp and woof of the culture then --and so, Darwin had to have known how radical his "science" was.

[furball4paws]

"The INHERENT (please look up that word, Evos) argument of Darwin's hypothesis is that the species evolved from lower life forms."

If that were true there wouldn't be any "lower forms" around today.