>>Your reply is tasteless and empty. <<
My response: LOL! That is the only possible response.
>>Human Evolution has done nothing for science and never will. <<
You really need to crack open a book or a magazine someday. Your belief or lack thereof doesn’t change facts. Putting your hand over your eyes does not make the sun go away.
>>I use the standard interpretation for the Bible that was translated by individuals more qualified than both of us. God said he formed Adam in His image, he did not evolve him from animals. <<
There are many many interpretations — King James is probably the least accurate. “Standard interpretations” are just that — interpretations. People who understand these things know about the debate on how literally the Bible — and Genesis in particular — can be taken. “Yom” alone gives scholars trouble and is wide open for interpretation by the reader, and thus the translator. In your own words, you use the word “formed.” That word alone, in its vague translation, is open to interpretation. By your own admission, there is no such thing as a literal interpretation of the Bible. But there is a lazy one.
>>To change the subject into a I hate Catholics post is insulting and shows how much of a child you are. If you want to attack my beliefs then I understand, but to make up me hating Catholics is pathetic. If this is the way you have debates about topics, then count me out.<<
You dodge the issue. You say that people who understand TToE and find it completely compatible with Christianity are hateful. Well, that would be Catholics according to doctrine (as well as many others).
Now you are the one who must reconcile your words with their implications. Words have meaning. Your words specifically state your position and that position is anti-Catholic (and anti-science but one thing at a time).
You can feel free not to respond, but you will be on public record as being anti-Catholic until you can clearly and cleanly state how your position — as stated in your tag line and thus repeated every time you post — is not.
And I notice you avoided my note that you (and your ilk) continue to have the arrogance to define who is and isn’t a proper “Christian.” That is a heck of an ego you got there.