Re: paleonet Thanks for replies

["Kenneth A. Monsch" <kmonsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is rationality the issue here? What is rationality? In unscientific terms, I
understand it to be: a way of thinking based on observed facts. Emotions and
beliefs, hence, play no role in rationality. From this results that
creationist viewpoints are irrational. What Peter has been trying, as I
understand it, is to demonstrate that accepting the evolutionary theory does
not need to contradict what the Bible says. In doing so, justifiable
assumptions (at least they seem justifiable to me) are made about the
symbolism of the Bible and what that symbolism means. Sound all rational to
me. Peter, I don't know what you're on about concerning Plate Tectonics, so
let me just stick to your piece about evolution. I don't remember your exact
words, but maybe there were no errors of fact about the evolutionary theory
there. Whether folks in the PaleoNetwork accept Peter's thoughts that God
created everything through evolution is I think irrelevant. We may accept
it, we may not. What I find relevant here though, is that a Christian
approaches the 'evolution issue' from a rational point of view and seeks to
bridge a gap without compromising his faith. The most influential Christians
unfortunately act in the opposite way. But consider this point: we should
educate the masses, convince them that what we do is relevant, even to them.
We are of course to promote that evolutionary theory has absolutely nothing
to say about the exisitince and works of God, but I think it's worth it to
get across that evolutionary theory doesn't imply that God doesn't exist and
does not contradict the Bible (if this is how you see it-I certainly do. I
personally don't agree with Daniel Dennett who claims that from evolutionary
philosophy follows that God doesn't exist -that's how I understood his
conclusions in "Darwin's Dangerous Idea"-, but I'm not going to dwell
further on that issue here).

Ken