Moose writes:
I find the all or nothing perspective of any area to be most troubling. In the case of the Bible, it is a collection of stories, selected and edited by man. It is divided into two major distinct parts (Old and New Testaments). Parts are presented as history while other parts are presented as spiritual teachings.
Why can't part of the Bible be valid information while other parts are erroneous? I say the Genesis creation story, especially if taken as precise and literal, is erroneous or at least flawed information. It badly conflicts with the information that can be seen in the creation itself.
Are you to believe what you can see in the real world or someones fanciful story about that real world?
I have often wondered about starting a new religion. Science has been villified to no end as the "bad guy" when early creation accounts are discussed. Yet GOD, if God exists, surely understands that the human animal is going to ask a lot of questions and discard old beliefs that are no longer relevant. Only an immature God would smite everything out of existence that He allegedly created, right?
Perhaps my new belief could be called Scientology...oh wait! That's been taken!
How about Christian Science? err...ahhh...sorry...also been taken.
Well then how about we just do away with religion entirely, while still acknowledging the possibility of God?