You can search for middle ground in the fray of the arguments, and
inhabit with your comfortable beliefs, but one fact remains. The
numerous hypotheses of creation by the hand of God are
UNTESTABLE, and therefore UNSCIENTIFIC. If you believe in
the beauty and simplicity of the scientific method as a model that
guides your life and your pursuit of the truth outside the laboratory,
then you will quickly find yourself among the agnostics.
So, find your middle ground. Feed your "inquiries". But realize that
your hybrid philosophy of the universal creation is only partially
based on scientific thinking. The other part is pure revelation.
> Asking ones
> self, "How could this be done?" has been the start of many a discovery. The
> Bible, the Torah, the Koran, and any number of other religious texts can
> serve to spur such inquiries.
>> >Any particular Bible has been translated too many times to have this level
> >of technical accuracy and the creation stories (of which there are two)
> >have independent sources and disagree on some key issues, relevant to the
> >debate, so what is the point?
>> I think the only point of any of this is a search for, and a continual
> testing of the truth as we understand it. What is true for us today may
> change because of evidence presented tomorrow. We must always question what
> we know, else we become complacent and ignorant.