Re: T/D #1 (Theistic/Deistic definitions)

Craig Rusbult (rusbult@vms2.macc.wisc.edu)
Mon, 27 Oct 1997 18:47:03 -0600

In an earlier message I said, re: the possibility of MIRM,
>> I won't say that some motion *is*
>> MIRM, but I think it *could be* MIRM, with a well-designed universe.

I'm less inclined now (than when I wrote the sentence above) to say that
"some motion ... *could be* MIRM..." Instead, maybe we should say that
most motion *is* (due to the way we define normal) Matter in Normal Motion.

Over the weekend, I reviewed some Biblical support for a theistic
rejection of "some-MIRM":
Near the end of Job (in chapters 36-42) there are many references to the
small things that God *does* (not just what he *did*) in Nature. For
example, Job 37:2-4,
"Listen, all of you, to the voice of God to the thunder that comes from
his mouth. He sends the lightning across the sky, from one end of the
earth to the other. Then the roar of his voice is heard, the majestic
sound of thunder, and all the while the lightning flashes."
But this is poetry, although poetry with theological meaning.

More direct are the words of Jesus in Matthew 10:29-31.
"Are not two sparrows sold for a penny, yet NOT ONE OF THEM WILL FALL TO
THE GROUND APART FROM THE WILL OF YOUR FATHER. And even the very hairs of
your head are all numbered. So don't be afraid; you are worth more than
many sparrows." (emphasis added)

I'm sure there are many other Biblical passages that could support a
no-MIRM view. Are there any passages that would dispute this, that say "in
some cases, God does just let it run on auto-pilot"?

Craig