Why evolution and Christianity cannot logically mesh

As best as I can tell a lot of life doesn't feed off other life forms, but instead gains its energy from the environment. Photosynthesis would be the obvious example. You'll never get off your opinion that this is cruel, no matter how many times arguments are levelled against this position. If you want to debate that side of things, then let me know and we can start it again. This time I'm going to approach this from a different point of view, and it isn't 'New Age Christianity'.What manner of God? Ialdaboath would be the manner of God of whom you speak. A cruel and unusual demiurge who was fooled by his mother into thinking he was the only being in existence (or he was jealous of the perfect creation). Such a demiurge could have created a universe of evolution and competition. With filth and competition and parasites and death and corruption.Ialdaboath blew life into man, using the light of Sophia (his mother) and to redeem the spiritual being that is man the real God sends the Aeon's of Jesus and the Holy Spirit.So there you have it - a version of Christianity with cruel evolution and that meshes perfectly well. Gnosticism might not be popular anymore, but it isn't New Age — by a looong shot.In the end - all you are suggesting is that one group of denominations is the right version of Christianity and that group of denominations believes in a doctrine that is contrary to evolution. Whether or not the denomination grouping that you decide is the right version is the right version is a matter of theological debate (a debate which can never be won).However, the fact that some denominations declare that their doctrine runs counter to evolution is hardly a revelation.So the question is - what do you want to debate?

1. that the thing you have defined as 'traditional Christianity' is the true version of Christianity?
2. that 'traditional Christianity' runs counter to evolution
3. something else
   

As I said (1) is a subjective mess and wars have been fought over what exactly the true version of Christianity is. With (2), that some people think evolution and their version of Christianity don't mesh is the reason the debate exists so there isn't much room for discussion there. If (3) what is it?

Thank you for taking on board the idea(s) I brought to the table. Ahh the old why do good people suffer paradox. The cause of many a priest that lost his faith. Another interesting thing to consider is those that believe in the doctrine of the Fall AND evolution - though that can be explained through allegory.

Murder is a legalistic term. Thou shalt not kill illegally. Where man might go wrong is how he defines unlawful killing.For instance - if I was transported to the Old Testament days I'd probably contend that stoning a woman to death on some spurious charge was not moral. One of us is right. Unless of course, objective morality is variable with time and applicable laws.Still, a lot of people think its OK to illegally kill someone in the right circumstances: Euthanasia, abortion, death penalty etc etc. If morality is nation and time-related specific (depending on your local laws) then a good deal of people still who have a skewed sense of morality when it comes to murder.