My point was that you have been, fairly arbitrarily, narrowing down the focus – “Judeo-Christians” here, “English-speaking Christians” previously.
Are you unaware of the existence of Muslim Creationism (of the likes of Adnan Oktar) and Hindu creationism?
It is you who is confused – the statement that I was replying to did not contain “the label ‘complete opposite’”:
My point remains, and goes beyond a mere quibble: the viewpoint that you are complaining about is part of both Theistic Evolution and of Science more generally.
Addendum: I think this analogy from @Roy is illuminating on this point:
You may be under the impression that you are making a coherent argument here, but you would be wrong. You have failed to:
-
Articulate exactly what “flaw” you are talking about.
-
To provide evidence to support your contention that “the average American” (even if such a mythical beast existed) is “already well acquainted with the stance” of the anomalous juxtaposition of two completely unrelated issues – the Resurrection and Evolution.
-
To demonstrate that this “stance” results in a “benefit”.
Now that’s just plain silly. You are claiming that Michael Behe’s nearly thirty-year career of publishing misrepresentations of science isn’t a problem? Likewise Dembski and Meyer? I beg to differ.
Your posts are long on assertion. Short on both evidence and reasoning to back up these assertions.