GDR flexes both what the bible says and what science says to fit his beliefs.
He believes in a loving god so he dismisses the hard parts of both old and new testaments and focuses on the soft. He interprets each new scientific discovery as revealing how god did it rather than treat what the bible says as literal. This means that every new scientific discovery is an opportunity to wonder at the ways of the Lord.
It's pretty cool, it means than no matter what is discovered it can not contradict his beliefs and moreover, the more incredible the discovery, the more amazing it proves the Lord to be. Science therefore confirms the belief.
In the rational person, beliefs can only be broken if the belief can't flex. Faith's beliefs can't flex so her defense is to irrationally deny the science, GDR's beliefs not only flex, they accommodate science; it's far less damaging and it's pretty much how the Anglican Church and to some extent, the Catholic Church, has been able to survive.
My real interest as it relates to this thread is the intersection of science and the supernatural. Once again, it would appear that science does not inform beliefs about the supernatural. The supernatural is still defined by our ignorance, and that definition is enforced by the claims that the supernatural can not be evidenced.
At one time in history the evidence of the supernatural was said to be all around us. The changing of the seasons, the path of the Sun in the sky, and the fermentation of grapes was all seen as the direct result of the supernatural. Over time, scientific explanations took the place of the supernatural. To protect what space the supernatural has left people will now claim that the supernatural can not be evidenced in the natural world, the exact opposite of how the supernatural used to be viewed. To paraphrase Stephen Weinberg, for those who claim there is no conflict between religion and science they may not realize how much territory religion has ceded.
™ Version 4.2
