Hahaha, as a Christian, I couldn't disagree more with that sentiment. It is my experience that fear of God is the basis for Christianity (more or less).
Anywho. . .
As for the argument that believing in natural selection is believing in evolution, there seems to be a bit of flawed logic there. Natural selection is [basically] adaptation, genetic learning if you will. There's a big difference between the vast random changes required for the accidental life theory of evolution and the fact that change happens over time whatever the speed.
When I look at things like emotion, art, ancient civilizations, the perfect distance of the earth from the sun which allows the right conditions for life, there's simply too much success with random change and events.
I found it pretentious when scientists found the most recent 'missing link' fossil that 'shows' the transition from sea to land animals. The fossil shows structure both for living on land and in water, somehow that must equate to evolution when adaptation to its environment is all that can be established as fact. How can anyone, scientist or not, say that the animal wasn't wiped out by the flash flood that buried the fossil, or that it became the alligator of today without somehow branching off to become other species?
Evolutionism largely starts with the theory and forces 'evidence' into its slots, a rather biased system to be called science. There is no proof for evolution, just conjecture based on a few pieces of the puzzle.
