> The attitude of caution about evolution expressed in the
>Alabama insert is something that Christians could appreciate and endorse
>- in 1897! A century ago it would have made sense to warn people about
>the uncertainties of evolution simply as a tactical matter, _while doing
>serious theological work to understand & express evolution in a sound
>Christian context_. But it is 1997, not 1897, & the tragedy is that so
>many Christians are still looking for excuses to dismiss evolution, &
>have not even begun to do the theoloical work which is necessary.
> A good exercise for anti-evolutionists would be to assume for
>the sake of argument that scientific evidence overall supports evolution
>("macroevolution" if you wish) & try to understand how it might be
>compatible with the Bible & ecumenical creeds. If they honestly try
>this, I think they will be surprised.
> (Some will be tempted to counter that supporters of evolution
>ought to try try the converse exercise. Many of us grew up doing that &
>eventually found it barren.)
> George Murphy
I think you are right that anyone who assumes that the existing data
supports evolution will be able to graft anything to that scheme.