[Maria S]

"The fact that he didn't spell it out exactly so you can understand evolution in the few chapters in Genisis, doens't mean he didn't do it."

Actually He DID spell it out in "Genisis" [as you spell it]: fish and fowl were created first, then the beasts of the field, then man. The creating didn't occur over ages; it occurred on specific days. God created the light "Day", and the darkness "Night". And the evening and the morning were the first day.

[narby]

fish and fowl were created first, then the beasts of the field, then man.

Exactly the same sequence as evolution says they were created.

Just as the separation of the days and nights come before that part.

If you read Genesis with a scientific eye, it actually has a significant correlation with science. It's hard to imagine how the ancients who recorded Genesis could come that close, unless it came from divine inspiration.

But, like all inspiration, it gets transmitted through the hand and language of man, and thereby the apparent conflicts are generated.

My point is that there are no contradictions.

If you can read the different Gospels, and reconcile the differences between them, then you can study evolution, and reconcile the difference between it and Genesis.