>>27358>You proved me wrongwhere? how?
my argument was "there is no conflict between theism and the big bang model"
the counter was "oh yeah, well young earth creationism is"
which i already agree, i am not a young earth creationist
but my original statement holds
>>27359>there is only one interpretation of genesis, 19th century biblical literalismfriend, if this is why you're atheist, you're not on very solid foundation.
take the time to look into what christians actually believe before you shit on us.
