Considering the breadth and depth of information/interpretations, I'd agree that different translations of Scripture have been altered in small ways that change the contexts of entire ideas presented. Personally, I choose to believe that amidst all that information, there is one true, consistent stream of information that if called upon from people more knowledgeable about it than myself, would prove beyond a reasonable doubt to at least be consistent. That includes the fearless comparing of other information/interpretations for consistency, but the process is quite extensive. However, no question gets unanswered or backed down from, which completely puts to rest the possibility of being led by blind faith. Basically, nonbelievers can ask questions or put forth information that these people would coolly and calmly respond to, and have no reason to get frustrated because they have their information on lock.

Most people on here, including myself admittedly, do not have a holistic set of ideas on lock, though a lot of ideas from believers here get embarrassingly misconstrued and thus thrown away. (Side note: the Internet is a terrible source to draw information from; compare the requirements in college campuses to draw from closed databases rather than the open web for a reason). Conversely, I realize that some believers cannot fully articulate their ideas without a proper backdrop to bring about understanding between them and the person they are debating with, and therefore get disposed of and ridiculed. Lack of articulation however, does not mean they did not have a fitting idea to work with in the first place.

Also, I've come to know that some Christians do not put on Bible glasses in vain as you are suggesting. Nor do they use it as a shield against scientific claims, nature, or whatever have yous. Rather, the truly devout immerse themselves into seeing what the world around us has to do with what's written in Scripture, and how contemporary findings can harmonize with it. I'm quite positive that Scriptural ideas getting thrown around as contradiction, fallacy, and what not reach them as well... even if the act of "putting on Bible glasses" is a bad thing considering the context you put it in, they have very insightful information that leaves no room into thinking that their beliefs are fueled by credulity.

Basically, as many secular scholars as their are out there, there are those who are compelled and open-minded enough to develop a harmonious secular and Scriptural intellect, one that they can profess and support through and through. That act alone is a far cry from the term "intellectual laziness" that is thrown around the forum; I'd also hope that someone doesn't reply to this sentence that I'm insinuating intellectual laziness on this forum, I am not. Folks, there is a horde of information out there that would put cherry-pickings, attacks on beliefs, and the Google/Yahoo/Any search engine plateau people perch themselves on (for support) to rest. There even exists scientists who ultimately see something like Creation as more believable then Evolution...

Although it is always inevitable that...

It comes down to this: People are going to believe what they will if they don't see it necessary to at least dabble in Scripture or have been disconnected by what seemed to be Scriptural errors/fallacies/inconsistencies. Ultimately, nobody can be considered less intellectual, only less informed.

Info. taken from Academic OneFile closed web resource. Named Works: Science, Evolution, and Creationism (Book).

Note: The above quotes were given simply to introduce the idea of scientists accepting a non-secular idea, and not to introduce a whole side debate on Creationism.

__________________