otoh - I can also think of many self-professed Christians who fail to behave as such, and also need to be evangelized to the Cross. Just an observation.
On your first point you set up a straw man. We all have fallen nature. The question is what grounding philosophy will we choose to live by?
On your second point, guilty as charged
OK, I went back and re-read your post. Maybe you could make this a little clearer:
Am I correct that you are suggesting that biological evolution is really a means to survive and improve in the absence of God? If so, I think that you are mistaken. I think that people who don’t believe in God do so for many reasons and biological evolution is probably very low to missing on the list. Have some people mis-applied evolution to validate behavior? Yes. Does that mean that all people who accept the massive amount of scientific data supporting evolution fall into the group that has mis-used the theory? No. I can tell you with 100% certainty that that isn’t true.
Your thesis seems to be a choice between God and science. Why can’t I belive in God and accept science at the same time? Am I misunderstanding your post? If so, what am I missing? If not, I stand by my original post - I choose both.
That’s what I thought. I was trying to be sure that I was following Michael’s meaning in his post. He used a different spelling and I wanted to be sure it was just that and not a different word and meaning.
zian:
What strawman?otoh - I can also think of many self-professed Christians who fail to behave as such, and also need to be evangelized to the Cross. Just an observation.
On your first point you set up a straw man. We all have fallen nature. The question is what grounding philosophy will we choose to live by?
On your second point, guilty as charged
I merely stated the obvious fact that there are people who call themselves Christian who fail to act as such. I wasn’t disagreeing with your statement, just making an observation, as I stated.
Guilty?? What accusation? (Not me.)
Ah. Tim, I see where we went off rails. I have no beef with Bio-evolution. My problem is with Evolution as an all encompassing philosophy of life–bio, spiritual, emotional. That is a FAR, FAR cry from scientific evolution. This evolution as a philosophy is a different bird altogether whose sloppy application allows for much evil in the past, seems to be an odd justification for atheists in the present, and will continue to damage true scientific study into physical evolution in the future.