By being a PC rather than an evolutionary creationist, one is implicitly
making such a limitation. At least in the definition of progressive
creation that I have always used which is the miraculous creation of
species/genera/families etc at different times. And by saying that
functional integrity is not likely, one is placing such a limitation on it.
At least that is what I think is the case.
>
>"Why could God not interfere constantly in the quantum world, causing the
>correct mutation thus mimicking the functional integrity view?"
>
>He could, of course. And Van Till may, indeed, be right! I just don't
>happen to think so, that's all.
Van Till and all the other theistic evolutionists may be right. What is
the data point that convinces you that God intermittently performed special
acts of creation rather than designing a smoothly functioning system
capable of evolution?
>
>Again, I don't disagree. I just think that that is not the answer. He did
>not "design" the wine event at Cana into the "fabric of the phase
>spaces," (whatever that might be. Nor did he "design" the specific
>actions I took as a result of at least one communication I've had from
>Him. Those actions were mine -- in response (I could have said "no" to
>the command I (and my wife) got that day.)
What I don't see is the connection between the communication you
miraculously recieved and the way God behaves with nature. That is what I
find puzzling. I see no causal connection between the two and see lots of
paleontological evidence for evolution rather than progressive creation.
glenn
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm