[betty boop]

I think the core issue of this debate is if man is fallible in his interpretation of the Bible, but not in his observations, assumptions, and interpretations of the universe around him.

In what way is man "infallible" with respect to "his observations, assumptions, and interpretations of the universe around him" when he is effectively limiting himself to what can be known via sense perception?

IOW, the heart of the scientific method is direct observation. Does this mean that all non-observables do not exist? (You know, those pesky little non-observables such as God, scientific theories, mathematics, love, hate, justice, fear, mind, etc., etc.?)

[kosciusko51]

BB,

If you look at my other responses, you will see that I am not defending infallibility.

-K51