Re: >Re: >RE: What does ID mean?
George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Mon, 04 May 1998 16:47:00 -0400
Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>
> At 05:02 PM 5/2/98 -0400, George Murphy wrote:
> >Glenn R. Morton wrote:
> >>
> >> At 10:46 AM 5/2/98 -0500, Moorad Alexanian wrote:
> >> >If God is not bound to do exactly opposite
> >> >of what our present laws indicate, then what do you mean by God's
> >> >sovereignty? Whatever God does is not like us changing our minds. We always
> >> >say that the laws we find are only approximate but will approach a sort of
> >> >limiting laws as time progresses. That is a very big assumption. Nobody
> >> >really knows.
> >>
> >> I must admit to being a little confused here about what you are trying to
> >> say. If God's sovreinty depends on His doing what we don't think he does,
> >> then when we change our mind, does God change his actions?
> >
> > The assumption seems to be that God's "sovereignty" is
> >equivalent to an absolute & arbitrary dictatorship. A common idea -
> >it's the kind of God most people would be if they could be God. But it
> >is not the God who is revealed in Christ.
>
> There is no record that Christ made any comments of our understanding of the
> physical universe. I believe that God is truly sovereign and that our laws
> describing nature do not constrain Him for any (future) action--future in
> our frame of reference. We do not know of God's plans vis a vis the universe
> as a physical entity. We read about a new earth and a new heaven, but I am
> sure we cannot incorporate that in our physical theories. Can we?
Your concluding question is certainly worth discussion, but you
have quite missed the basic issue: Is Christ really the fullest
revelation of who God is and of God's relationship with the world?
Indeed, science by itself doesn't tell us about how God acts in
the world. But neither does philosophical theism - which is where most
ideas about God's nature & attributes come from.
I continue to be amazed that so many Christians leave Christ
completely out of the picture in dealing with issues of the relationship
of science and theology. It sometimes seems that he is regarded simply
as an instrument for a "Plan B" of some generic deity to get his
creation out of a jam.
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@imperium.net
http://www.imperium.net/~gmurphy