My response to metmom which you were to tpathetic to read or understand apparently.....
Notice the inability of metmom or anyone else to answer?
The construction you seem so enamored of is that if one accepts evolution that they are only “claiming” to be Christian and somehow also reject the notion of God’s miraculous involvement with the world.
Seeings as how Pope Benedict XVI said evolution was a “fact which enriches our understanding of life and being and such” do you think he too is only “claiming” to be a Christian or that he rejects Gods miracles?
It matters not at all that he is the Pope except to illustrate the absurdity of your argument. If another were selected and he said it as Karl Ratzinger, would you assume that “Karl” was only “claiming” to be a Christian, and would you think that he also rejected the virgin birth or the resurrection of Jesus the Christ?
metmom:
So, amd, please explain why the virgin birth and the resurrection are acceptable things to believe in in contradiction to science, but the creation account isn’t.
Thank you, ZC, for putting it so succinctly.
YHAOS:
The Hebrew people knew it back to a time incalculable by me. So, tell me allmendream, how was Mankind Created? The Universe (the heaven and the earth)? Or, even simply, water?