| appolose said: If it was a person's interpretation of the events that was recorded, that would destroy the theology of many Bible-believing Christians ("The Bible can't be wrong because it's inspired by God"). What I'm saying is, that view is impossible to hold for such Christians (not that the view itself is impossible). As for it being blind submission, I'll say that anything I conjecture about reality is as equally blind (unproven), whether it be evolution or the Bible (if you feel like torturing yourself, you can wade through this thread to find a defense of what I've said). Our faculties are useless without a starting knowledge. |
I know. But it shouldn't. Faith in God is about more than jsut believing that he guided the hands of people who wrote his holy book. I mean, Genesis' dual (contradictory) creation myths alone do not lend to me treating the book as infallible - my faith can't be built on the veracity of the written word, especially not one that's gone through so many changes and translations. This argument might hold water if all of these people were reading the text in Hebrew as opposed to (usually) the KJV.
And I have to disagree. Conclusions we arrive at through observation are not blind, they are operating within the bounds of the faculties given to us. There's a difference. Evolution is very real. If my faith didn't allow for me to incorporate a wider view of the universe... well, I guess I'd have to drop it altogether.
