Evolution is a valid cosmology for Christians

-Thank you for presenting your arguments. -I will now form a rebuttal to each of your individual contentions. -Also I apologize for bringing "fundamentalist" groups into the equation, but considering this is an internal debate between opposite ends of the Christian spectrum, a conservative stance is necessary. Rebuttal 1 | "A dichotomy between the days of creation in Genesis and evolution is not a dichotomy between evolution and Christianity" -What you define as "essential Christian doctrine" appears to disregard the majority of the old testament. I am not a Christian, but from what I know about Christianity, interpreting the creation narrative as a metaphor, or outright rejecting it, severely limits the validity of the rest of the bible. If the word of god is not inerrant or infallible than how are we to determine the minute portion that is factual? Rebuttal 2 | "The nuances of the word yom do not negate theistic evolution" -That is precisely what I sought to eliminate in the last round. The word yom in the Hebrew language has a strict framework for how it can be used. When preceded by a numerical digit, the words always, with no exceptions, refers to a literal, twenty-four hour day. Whether or not you choose to believe that and still consider yourself a Christian is beyond my control. Rebuttal 3 | "The concept of the Sabbath remains intact even (sic) the first three chapters of Genesis are metaphor" -The one sentence you provided is pure speculation. There is no evidence in the bible (first time I've ever said that) to support your assertion. The Sabbath has its origins on the seventh day when God rested and determined that all he created was good. Genesis 2:2-3 "And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. " . http://www.biblegateway.com... -Without this notion of rest and sanctification attributed to this particular day, keeping the Sabbath holy has no measure particular measure of worth of significance. Evolution is slow, gradual process and there would be no need to limit existence into a rigid, seven-day framework if it was not created in a literal seven-day process. Rebuttal 4 | "Original sin and death are not essential to Christian doctrine" -I know a lot of Christians, some more conservative than others, but I have never in my life heard of a Christian who disregards the notion of an original sin. The purpose of the original sin was to set man in a state of separation from god in order for a Christ figure to redeem man from his spiritual damnation and allow for the opportunity of salvation. Without this concept, there would no need for Jesus Christ, seeing that his intended purpose was to save mankind from this original sin. Sin would have a mysterious origin that man would not understand, not unlike the initial creation of the universe, without an initial spark. -Again, you are making a claim that is unwarranted and has no factual evidence. Deeming the piece of fruit from the tree of good and evil a metaphor in and of itself for something even more mysterious has no basis by which to defend. Also, physical death would take place unless an original sin had previously occurred. God considered everything he created to be good and without flaw. The notion of death would be a chink in the armor of perfection that god had intended. All of the atrocities that occur in today's world, according to the bible, the result of this original sin. If this had not occurred, we would still be in the garden of Eden. Rebuttal 5 | "While viewing parts of Genesis as metaphorical may cause us to question whether Christ's resurrection was metaphorical, it does not necessitate it" -I do not argue questioning everything to be a bad thing, but from the perspective of a Christian, viewing the creation narrative as a metaphor does call into question the rest of the bible. The bible doesn't hold a lot of water if only certain aspects of it are intended to be understood the way in which they were written. By opening the entire bible up for interpretation, you create the possibility of multiple, contrasting views that causes a divide in the followers of god. Catholicism and Protestantism clearly exemplify this, and neither has any more merit than the other if they both deem certain aspects literal and some figurative.