I am dogmatic about the Bible being the inerrant word of God. So was Issac Newton and a host of other pre-19th century scientists. To me, science is a revelation of God. What I find disheartening are the attempts by us humans to elevate our own intellect/rationality to the place rightly occupied by the Lord. Hitler was a good example of this and illustrates the inherent danger of the humanist philosophy. Hitler sought to elevate the "aryian race". His proposition was based on the humanist philosophy of evolution. If he was a student of the Bible he would have understood that "God is no respecter of persons", a concept that would have invalidated his quest for establishing racial superiority amongst the human race. Is it a wonder it was doomed to fail? I feel that there exists absolute Truth. I believe the Bible contains it. Many people feel the Bible contains only part [or none] of the truth. If this is the case, then who is to say what is Truth? My truth becomes no better than yours. This is evident in todays` western culture, where absolute Truth has been replaced by social relevence and situational ethics. Why do I believe the Bible? Because it explains things. It explains how the world could come together in the latter days under one religion. Scince, in absence of absolute truth, all religions are equal. The Bible explains the design and order that surrounds us and reflects our Creator`s sense of beauty. The alternative is a universe without a cause and damns humanity to a purposeless existence. Is there anything more cruel? It explains how [in the words of the apostle Paul] "men would be ever-learning, but never coming to the knowledge of the Truth", as they build their castles in the sand. Brother, look around you, we have become those men.

• constraints of a dogmatic viewpoint - tenacious - September 28, 2000 - 23:43 UTC