[AndrewC]

Nice line. But I have no idea what it means.

It means your hypothetical is just that, hypothetical. God(religion) will not be "destroyed" no matter what argument you start with.

[narby]

It means your hypothetical is just that, hypothetical. God(religion) will not be "destroyed" no matter what argument you start with.

That's not my point. My point is that some believers will reject God because they're given an either/or situation. I never claimed that someone's goal of "destroying Christianity" would be successful. Just that they will succeed in tempting some away from God by starting an emotional fight over an unimportant issue. Every person lost in this way is a tragedy and believers should not enable it.

[JeffAtlanta]

God(religion) will not be "destroyed" no matter what argument you start with.

Christians trying to protect Christianity have done more harm than any non-Christian. The point is that when zealots and scientifically ignorant Christians embarrass Christianity far more than anyone on the outside ever has.

Who cares? Well, Christians should because it hurts their witness. When Christians attack scientific principles in which they are completely ignorant, they as individuals and Christianity as a whole loses credibility.

Look at how the greatest minds in the church reacted when Copernicus published his theory that the earth was not the center of the universe. The Christian leadership didn't use sound scientific evidence to challenge his theory - they used bible verses and traditional church teachings.