“The only reason that there is the need to make Genesis be read as an allegory, is to force it to conform to the current naturalistic interpretation of the no-God allowed creation account of the scientific community.”
This statement is wrong on many levels. First of all, God is not only allowed in science, he is welcome. Most believers in evolution are devoutly religious, as am I. If you are not going to interpret Genesis with the context of available observation, then you need to ensure that you communicate that as faith, and not as science. To state otherwise is a selfish co-opting of Christianity and betrays a weakness in one’s own faith.
God gave us the brains to figure out how he got us here; he’d be disappointed if we didn’t try.
I get so sick of people trying to manipulate creationists into believing evolution by accusing them of having *weak faith*. It’s not going to work.
On the contrary, I would think that it’s the people with the weak faith that have to twist Scripture to match science because they don’t have the strong enough faith to believe God over the subjective interpretation of man’s observations when there’s an apparent conflict between the two.
Apparently your memo isn't getting out because your pal allmendream here has on several occasions stated "God has no place in science class".
God gave us the brains to figure out how he got us here; he’d be disappointed if we didn’t try.
Kettle meet pot! And for someone to say this and genuinely mean it, then why the endless contortions to keep children from understanding it?
If you guys understand science and religion and logic this way, it must really be something to see what y'all think philosophically! (I've already seen a slip or two about separation of church and state).