Stephen:
>It is *not* "well documented" at all, "that Christianity is opposed to
>science". This was the thesis of two 19th century books: John William
>Draper's "History of the Conflict between Religion and Science" and
>Andrew Dickson White's "A History of the Warfare of Science with
>Theology in Christendom", but AFAIK no modern historian believes that
>any more:
Stephen J. Gould has recently proposed that science and religion need not,
and in fact do not, conflict. You, yourself, have quoted Johnson sneering
at Gould for taking that stand. I have said in the past that science and
religion cannot ultimately conflict because they inhabit the same reality
(this is the semi-official Unitarian Universalist denominational position).
You have sneered at *me* for it and quoted volumes (mostly from Johnson) in
an attempt to refute me.
Now you are talking out of the other side of your mouth. Which is your
actual position?
Stephen:
>Actually I am quite happy for Chris to keep making ad hominem
>comments, because it tells me that he is running out of arguments!
this is a serious "pot/kettle" problem from the author of the phrase
"atheist thinking"
Susan
----------
For if there is a sin against life, it consists not so much in despairing
of life as in hoping for another and in eluding the implacable grandeur of
this one.
--Albert Camus