It seems there is a difference between the functional integrity position
as explained above and the caricature one sometimes hears. We have
already discussed how Phil Johnson, if pressed, will deny the "theism
depends on gaps" caricature of his position, despite the fact that, to
many of us, that is the message that comes across.
Maybe my fears about players in this debate putting _a priori_
restrictions on God could be assuaged if those involved could answer
these questions in the negative:
1) If it turns out [whether we could discover this in our Earthly life is
another question, but I'm being hypothetical] that God *DID* act in a
gap-filling way on at least one occasion in the development of the
physical world, would that destroy Howard van Till's theology?
2) If it turns out that God *DID NOT* act in such a manner, would that
destroy Phil Johnson's theology (or that of Moreland, whose PSCF article
sparked this thread by seeming to demand that God fill gaps)?
By the way, I enthusiastically endorse the other comments about how
tragic it is that so many Christians have bought into a "scoring system"
in which discoveries in the natural sciences are counted as points
against theism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Dr. Allan H. Harvey | aharvey@boulder.nist.gov |
| Physical and Chemical Properties Division | Phone: (303)497-3555 |
| National Institute of Standards & Technology | Fax: (303)497-5224 |
| 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303 | |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| "Don't blame the government for what I say, or vice versa." |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------