Jann, Your statement is absolutely correct. We are now in a time when that split is beginning to be seen (by some) to be over. That doesn't mean the scientific perspective has won and explains everything. I believe that is the point behind our work on the Other World. It does mean that the "religious" ability to have a truly significant role in our human journey it will need to move out of the two story universe and into a new understanding. There is a need for a "Grand Design" that allows the two domains of life (objective, subjective - explicit, implicit) to be integrated. This means not everything will have a scientific answer (explanation) nor will we have to say, "Well, you're just going to have to accept this on faith". We will arrive at a point where there is a mutual recognition of each domain and how they interact, inform and compliment each other. As to the "Grand Design", it is the contention of some that the creative process, that which underlies all, is inherently intelligent and that intelligence can be understood. Please continue to comment, it is of value. G&P, Jack On May 20, 2012, at 12:03 PM, LAURELCG@aol.com wrote:

Actually, I did participate, as follows, on May 17. I've assumed that the great creation stories of the world WERE the scientific world view at the time they were formulated and that science and religion only split around the time of Galileo.

Guess it wasn't wordy enough to get a response.

Blessings to all, Jann

In a message, John Epps wrote:

So far all of us participants have been, as one participant called our demographic, "pale, stale, and male." Do you suppose the subject is just not that interesting, or are there other reasons? _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net

Sincere apologies, Jann, and I think you're right about the split occurring around Galileo's time. Maybe up until then, theologians were pretty good at using the current world-view to state their views. Probably Galileo's findings changed that world-view, and theology didn't keep up. I hope we can avoid that error this time around. Thanks for your insights. John At 11:03 AM 5/20/2012, you wrote:

Actually, I did participate, as follows, on May 17. I've assumed that the great creation stories of the world WERE the scientific world view at the time they were formulated and that science and religion only split around the time of Galileo.

Guess it wasn't wordy enough to get a response.

Blessings to all, Jann

In a message, John Epps wrote:

So far all of us participants have been, as one participant called our demographic, "pale, stale, and male." Do you suppose the subject is just not that interesting, or are there other reasons? _______________________________________________ Dialogue mailing list Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net