>Perhaps the moderator ought to say what he thinks is appropriate in this
George, the rules of the list say LACK of interest, not too much interest,
determine if it is more appropriate to take a discussion off list :-)
>I was not expressing any criticism of Sondra's questions,
That's nice to hear.
>Although I think that in some cases she has misread what people were trying
>to say, & only further discussion can clarify that.
Hence the need for discussion.
>My reason for suggesting that these
>matters be dealt with off-list is simply that otherwise we could easily be
>swamped by with lots of people explaining, defending, debating &c their
>theological positions on matters that, in some cases, don't have a lot to
>with the relationships of science and theology.
To be honest, I thought that Sondra's questions got down to the
level that we are normally too "afraid" to talk about. I wish more people
raise these issues. I think that it would make discussions A LOT more
>We get enough posts on topics
>like original sin without having separate threads on George Murphy's, Jim
>Eisele's, &c &c views on original sin.
FWIW, I don't feel like talking about original sin at the moment. From my
reading of Sondra's post, I don't think that was her main point. I'm
to let the discussion "go where it may" and die if there is lack of
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jul 13 2002 - 00:06:44 EDT