Re: [asa] How theistic evolution was explained to kids in 1964

From: Merv <>
Date: Wed Jul 30 2008 - 20:11:17 EDT

Jim Armstrong wrote:
> Seems to me that meshing is exactly how they interact.
> JimA [Friend of ASA]

The word "meshing" seems to imply still, a separation --no matter how
intricately entwined (hearkening back to Gould's NOMA --Non Overlapping

There must be a better word for expressing the thought that science is a
subset of "God-thought" or theology. I.e. that good theology
encompasses and includes all of science as well as much more. And
those who reject any theology are free to pretend that the "science set"
is the largest set and has no other super-sets to contain it.

This way the biologist (secular or otherwise) makes potentially accurate
commentary on how the body develops inside the womb. And the theist can
also correctly wax eloquent on God's hand being intimately involved in
*every* step of that process --without disagreeing one whit with the
aforementioned biologist's observations.

The latter celebrates & freely participates in science and does so from
the larger super-set perspective, and the former is free to remain
within the science set and not stray outside of it unless she wishes.


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jul 30 20:12:39 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jul 30 2008 - 20:12:39 EDT