[quote]You can have Christianity and God with macroevolution. It's not hard until people start taking scripture literally and applying their own "logic" to fill in gaps they are too limited to discover.[/quote]Interpretation of Genesis is to be taken literally. Here's why: (1) The original translation explained that the process of creation was described with the Hebrew word "yom," which literally meant one 24-hour day. (2) God, by definition, is omnipotent (Luke 1:37); therefore, He can create whatever He wants from nothing (Genesis 1:1). [quote]Religion is flexible and open to interpretation.[/quote]Whatever religion (besides Chrisianity) one is from, I have no bone to pick with them. For Christianity however, the interpretation for very every passage is the same as it should be interpreted and is never to changed or under questionable discussion in order to be more appeasing. [quote]It can adapt...[/quote]You lost me after you said "it." What is "it"? Are you referring to the Bible or Evolution? [quote]Watch the evolution episode of cosmos with Neil Degrasse Tyson. It goes over the evolution of the eye in simple terms.[/quote]Does it have a rebuttal against Darwin's statement, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I confess, absurd in the highest degree...The difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection , though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered subversive of the theory" ([i]On the Origin of Species[/i], Chapter 6), or against Richard Dawkins admittance, which was mentioned in the OP? You can mention it on the forums since I may not have time to watch it.

Ok I have iron banner to finish and I'm at work so I cant get to this now. Feel free to reply again if you have any stronger points because so far this will be easy. Though at the end of this I doubt either of us will be happy or see eye to eye. Just to frame my arguments what is your interpretation of the world because I need to know what I'm dealing with. Do you claim the earth is 6000 years old? We're all dinosaurs vegetarians on the arc or bones placed there by the devil. A summary of your religious views would help and any classic arguments you hold to. Irreducible complexity and no macroevolution are a couple so far. And I promise I will respect your views as best I can I wont be picking apart your beliefs just using them to frame my replies, but for now I can already tell this will go south since you already have something completely wrong. Yom does not mean 24 hour it actually specifically doesn't designate any particular length. It means long age and it only gets a time frame in context which the Torah does not give. Edit: in fact it better translates to 12 hours or less since the only real context given is time of light but without an earth as a starting point, which didn't happen on the first, time of light isn't even an earth 24 hour day, it's cosmological

[quote]In fact, it better translates to 12 hours or less since the only real context given is time of light but without an earth as a starting point, which didn't happen on the first, time of light isn't even an earth 24 hour day, it's cosmological[/quote]Your right since the translation is literally equated to the same literal meaning as "day light." I just said 24-hour days for the sake of avoiding specific semantics (and also for the reasoning that the Genesis account stated that each day had an evening and morning), but I don't know where you got the "or less" part.

Time the sun is out isn't always 12 hours

You think? Why do you think we have leap year?