If abiogensis, and hence macro-Evolution are true, there is no God.
Why should the former necessitate the latter?
If *god* could not get it correct the first time, and required millions of years and countless cycles of death to create, why would anyone want to serve that *god*? he/she is not much of a *god*, really nothing more than blind chance!
Evolution and God are mutually exclusive. To mix them is intellectually dishonest to the premise of either, and an anathema to both. Darwin wrote to refute the creation account. Genesis was written to explain how Jesus did it in 6 days! Only one can be correct. Read Genesis for the creation sequence. It has Earth first, then light, then sun (stars were after sun & moon!). Water first, then earth. Water and Fowl first, then land animal.
If Genesis got it wrong, the whole Bible is in question and invalid, for it claims to be The Word of God, perfect, ineerant, and everlasting. Either the Bible is perfect, or man's ability to sit in judgement of it is perfect.
Um Newsflash for you dude. The Bible says that the value of Pi is 3. Not very "perfect".
Why? Is the Bible invalid because it says that rabbits chew their cud, or that bats are birds, or that locusts have four legs? If most Christians are willing to overlook those faux pas, why can't they accept the validity of Scripture without taking Genesis literally?
We've been going over this material on another thread. The scientific observations in the Bible are perfect, so you therefore must believe that birds, bats, and flying insects are the same thing; that insects have four legs; and that hares chew their cud.
If the Bible is perfect, why do those who insist that it is disagree so much on what it means and what it compels? Do you avoid rounding the corners of your beard? Do you stay away from blended materials for your clothing? The Amish won't use buttons because they're not in the Bible. Yet you use the internet. Confusing, to say the least.
Isn't a lightning strike evidence of God's will? Isn't it therefore unGodly to have a lightning rod? (That's what the pious told Benjamin Franklin when he invented the lightning rod).
Then there's the case of Pope John Paul II, who stated that the theory of evolution need not conflict with Catholic doctrine.
On the other hand, if God has inflicted all those deaths just to slap down some disobedient twit, why should anyone consider that deity anything other than an abusive parent?
You're assuming, of course that you understand what God's plan was. I'd suggest that things have unfolded exactly as he intended it. I find it rather presumptuous of you to suggest that you have a better idea of how to do it 'right'.
Genesis was written to explain how Jesus did it in 6 days!
Of course, 'Jesus' isn't mentioned in Genesis at all. As a Jew, I reject the notion that he had anything to do with it.
If Genesis got it wrong, the whole Bible is in question and invalid, for it claims to be The Word of God, perfect, ineerant, and everlasting. Either the Bible is perfect, or man's ability to sit in judgement of it is perfect.
You are going off on an entirely different tangent now. The infallibility of scripture (or rather, the infallibility of your favored interpretation of scripture) has nothing to do with the question of whether or not evolution being true necessitates that God does not exist.
There are plenty of theists who have no problem reconciling their belief in God with their acceptance of the theory of evolution.