tomfoolery

SZYGMUNT@exodus.valpo.edu
Mon, 5 Aug 1996 14:53:44 -0500 (CDT)

Art Chadwick wrote, in response to Steve Clark:

==========================================================================
Steve says:

>Thus, a Christian can embrace evolution without doing damage to the faith,
>and, interestingly enough, an atheist can reject evolution without doing
>damage to her faith.

Without entering into the first issue you raise, I would like some examples
of atheistic believers. That would indeed be interesting.
Art
http://chadwicka.swac.edu

==========================================================================

Art, is this an attempt at humor or did you really misunderstand Steve's
message? It seems very clear to me from his post that he was referring
to the "faith" of an atheist in the sense of her refusal to believe in God.
I hope this was clear to everyone who read Steve's post. Why then did you
respond the way you did? It came across to me (correct me if I am wrong,
please!) as a very picky cheap shot, and more than just a little sarcastic.

This post rubbed me the same way as Neal Roy's post earlier, in which he
completely misunderstood the sense of a previous post by Brain Harper. I
suggest those of you who have been firing such "shots" read through a post
very carefully before you respond. Ask yourself these things:

1. Do I have anything constructive to contribute? (certainly criticism can be
constructive if it is expressed in the right way)

2. Am I assuming something about the motives of the person I'm responding to?
(usually this is a bad way to proceed)

3. Am I responding out of anger or outrage or out of an honest desire to seek
the truth?

4. Do my words contain more light than heat?

Let's all make an effort to keep this discussion about specific issues arising
from the creation/evolution debate, and to speak the truth in love as we
exchange our ideas.

Stan Zygmunt
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy
Valparaiso University
Valparaiso, IN 46383