[WildTurkey]

By the same token, rejecting a Creator based on Evolutionary theory, has absolutely no scientific basis and can not be supported in scientific terms. Those who claim there is no Creator are simply stating their belief

In the THOUSANDS of posts in the last few weeks, I have NEVER seen anyone reject the Creator based on evolutionary theory.

[gobucks]

In the THOUSANDS of posts in the last few weeks, I have NEVER seen anyone reject the Creator based on evolutionary theory.

In the THOUSANDS of posts in the last few weeks, I have NEVER seen anyone entertain the Creator is even slightly possible if they were already committed to random-chance-natural-selection-based evolutionary theory.

[Ditto]

In the THOUSANDS of posts in the last few weeks, I have NEVER seen anyone reject the Creator based on evolutionary theory.

I wasn't speaking about posters here (and I haven't read thousands of posts on this myself). I simply meant to point out that evolution says nothing about Creation, but I'm sure in the wide-wide world, there are those who cite evolution to deny Creation. My point is that it can not be used that way.

There seems to be long range artillery barrages going on between Biblical literalists and secular atheists and too often shells are falling short on those of us in the middle who find no logical, theological or scientific problem in accepting both Creation and Evolution.