[Dimensio]

So, frankly, when evolutionists decry Christianity, for instance, especially when they assume the absence of a God,

What about evolutionists who don't assume the abscence of a God?

[Smokin' Joe]

That, too, implies a religious structure (for the belief in God), just not the substitution of the theory of evolution for a deity. Those who most religiously defend Evolution (with a capital 'e') do so as a substitute for the belief in a deity, not in addition to such beliefs.

They have replaced God with a theory.

People express their faith in whatever beliefs they will.

Personally, I believe God can use any method He wants to populate a planet--who am I to argue with God?

However, I can see more balance in one who would undertake scientific investigation not to the exclusion of, but in addition to their belief in a God (or Gods, as the case may be).

So often the theory of Evolution is held up as somehow 'proving' God does not exist, that all creatures great and small are derived by chemical or biological accident.

We casually throw around vast numbers without fully comprehending their scope (for instance, how long would it take to spend a Billion dollars at one dollar per second?--just over 1900 years).

Then the argument is polarized by assuming the days of Genesis are 24 hour days, and that only one or the other is correct.

An all-powerful entity could certainly accomplish anything in so short a time, without the logistical, bureaucratic, and regulatory encumbrances of human projects, but the bottom line is that either scenario boggles the human mind, one for its sheer of duration (4.6 billion years) and the other for its vastness of accomplishment and apparent lack of duration.