Posted by Pangea (184.108.40.206) on May 11, 2004 at 13:54:29:
In Reply to: For Pangea - Intro to answers posted by Chris on May 11, 2004 at 12:06:50:
Apparently, Chris, you either haven't paid much attention to what I've said in the past or you've missed a lot of my posts.
I have always maintained a belief in God that lies outside of scientific empiricism. And I have defended that belief to anonymous, Mick, and others in the past.
I happen to believe that God chooses to operate Creation undetectably via natural laws and personal, subjective inspiration. I also submit that there is NO scientific or historical evidence that God has ever operated Creation via detectable, supernatural intervention. I base my belief both on the evidence of empirical science and on the absence of independently verifiable evidence for miracles.
But that is neither here nor there. Your assessment of what I believe is flawed. My beliefs in no way prevent me from sharing life with a devout Methodist nor regularly attending (even participating) in religious services. My view of God is actually quite open-ended. My refusal to accept the Bible as the definitive "word of God" in no way impedes my belief that many passages in the Bible (including Genesis, BTW) were inspired by a deep abiding faith in God on the part of the authors. IMHO, God may certainly have inspired the desire to write passages depicting Creation as a spiritual event. But you'll have to a long way to "prove" to me that God dictated the passages directly and intended them to serve as a factual history of origins.
Post a Followup