Reed Konsler <email@example.com>:
I agree. I think you could also sit down and rationalize everything you read in your holy book of choice. Developing a simple argument into a deep and complex one is natural as falling off a log.
But towards what purpose? And how do you know
where to start, before you know what the answer is?
Well, I wasn't talking out "rationalizing" science, which I admit would be a bad thing; in fact I was making a point about concession to human weakness, i.e. we *could* sit down and give rationally / emperically demonstrate all of the major discoveries of science to children, and to an extent, we try, but (as Tim said) most of us had better things to do with our childhood. Much of that material will be taken on trust and pretty pictures, but I think we should fight at all costs to avoid having any of it taken on "blind faith". Let them not believe, rather than that.
As to "rationalizing" holy-texts, I have several examples of major theologians giving up that task as futile (Martin Luther comes to mind...) Not to say it can't be done, just that it can't be done without sacrificing more than most want to...
 "Many sweat to reconcile St. Paul and St. James, but in vain.
justifies' and 'faith does not justify' contradict each other flatly. If any one can harmonize them I will give him my doctor's hood and let him call me a fool." -- Martin Luther