Thanks for the reply Rob, and I hope you enjoy your vacation.
But I am suprised you're having difficulty... though you are a much more sophisticated politician than I, Ms. Adminastasia. A shrewd one you are... quite the diplomat.
I am not any kind of politician, Mr. Scottness, and I don't have an agenda. I know what you are thinking, and it is not true.
In many ways I believe in design. The problems arise when I try to guess where the design figures in in. Is it all conceived of at once, in some moment of creation, or is it guided in an unfolding process which is observed?
I won't even bother to differentiate between creation and ID, as they are essentially the same minus whatever specifics come along with Biblical creationism. The point is not that you, Rob, are a pantheist. Rather, IMO, a belief that God started at A and got to B, without special creation and using science as we know it, can only result in the extremes of pantheism or deism. To maintain the integrity of the Christian tradition, the only logical option is to favor a panentheistic view. At least, that is my tentative conclusion.
So, my next step was to rehash what we know of God's nature, Biblically or doctrinarily. Christianity has the unfortunate role of making it nearly impossible to comprehend God without Jesus. Christ is trememdous obviously in personal spirituality, but the current conflicts with science illustrate, to me anyway, how genuinely inadequate our picture of God is.
I hope I don't get in trouble for mentioning the G word, but please understand that my comments are not repetitions of Paul's, or intended to slight your beliefs. I just see what I see, and I am not done looking yet.