One last thing – my point on the NCSE was that they could better use their time advocating good science education than indulging in yet more navel gazing about the reconciliation of religion and science.

I understand the frustration, but at the same time my point would be that if you’re trying to gather constituencies behind a cause, each constituency needs to see their issues addressed. I would imagine that is what NCSE is doing.

In my opinion, any attempt to ‘prove’ the supernatural using the tools of science and reason is doomed to failure (though I know others disagree). Those who have made the choice in favor of religion don’t need to write a book about it – they can explain their positions in a single sentence: “I have faith, and it’s not in conflict with science. ” Saves a lot of time.

To those who feel that this is an attack on their religious beliefs, I can only say that I think you misuderstand my argument. I may not share your beliefs, but I am not attempting to make any value judgements on them.

One last thing – my point on the NCSE was that they could better use their time advocating good science education than indulging in yet more navel gazing about the reconciliation of religion and science.

As I commented on another post:

“IMHO, it is fair to say that most theistic evolutionists are willing to make common cause with others who oppose antievolutionism, even if our partners do not share our religious beliefs. However, it is very difficult for us to work as partners in promoting evolution with those that are simultaneously attacking our religious beliefs. Those who do this are actually making it less likely for evolution to gain widespread support since most of the opposition to it is theologically based & not scientific. (Ok, there are lots of pseudo-scientific arguments against evolution, but I’m not counting these). Dawkins has been called “God’s greatest gift to creationism” – I wouldn’t articulate it like this but the point is valid.”