Ah, but lack of evidence _is_ necessarily correspondent to a lack
of _belief_. At least, it is necessary if you don't want to be
gullible.
There are an infinite number of unevidenced prepositions. You
literally cannot believe them all because you have a finite mind. In
addition, for each preposition, you can formulate a similarly
unevidenced assertion that contradicts it.
Thus, we need a tool to weed the true from the false. Most of us
use evidence, and I'm sure you apply that standard to many things
in your daily life. Do you use this tool in regards to your
religion? If so, what evidence do you have that compelled you to
believe? If not, why not, and how do you go about separating the true
from the false?
> If it is possible that God does exist, then it is still possible
> that the Bible is inerrant. I guess I am arguing Darrel's approach
> to it, as he is arguing mine.
It's possible that you are nothing more than a brain in a vat
sitting on some mad scientist's lab bench, and that everything
you see and feel is nothing more than electrical impulses being
fed to that gray matter.
It's possible. But are you going to worry about it? Probably not.
Neither am I going to worry about your God.
jason
--
"The man who marries a modern woman marries a woman who expects to vote
like a man, smoke like a man, have her hair cut like a man, and go without
restrictions and without chaperones and obey nobody."
BOBBED HAIR - John R. Rice, 1941 http://www.primenet.com/~steiners/