Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
But as you seem to say and as Brian Whatcott has
noted, Christian faith--or at least fundamentalist Christian
faith--is actually founded on the thesis that these events really did
happen as described AND that those descriptions rule out natural
explanations. To admit the possibility of natural explanations for
those events or that the descriptions could be inaccurate is, as I
understand it, to engage in heresy at some level.
I would hope so, but I'm not convinced that they do for the reasons
stated above. Moreover, it would have to be remarkably compelling
evidence given the astonishing nature of the testimony. IMO there is
no such remarkably compelling evidence. That is where blind faith
becomes essential.
I might go on to offer my opinion that there should exist some very
significant cognitive dissonance in the mind of a scientist who is
also a fundamentalist Christian.