Re: A neat syllogism

George Murphy ("gmurphy@raex.com"@raex.com)
Wed, 01 Dec 1999 10:41:46 -0500

Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>
> Dear George,
>
> Your posts are always very challenging and I use them to sharpen my own
> sword. I do agree that God's creative activity is delegated to part of His
> creation. But can't God "change His mind" and cease that from being the
> case? I believe that He can and so to say that the creation will go on
> regardless is a basic assumption.

I'm not sure I understand this but that may be because of the way I
formulate a doctrine of providence. The traditional way of stating the matter is to
divive providence into preservation, cooperation (or concurrence) & governance, &
usually to subsume cooperation (i.e., God's action with & through natural processes)
under either preservation or governance. It seems to me that in light of the dynamic
picture of the world which relativity, QM, & modern science in general gives us, it
may be better to reverse that, emphasize God's cooperation with natural processes, & to
a certain extent subsume preservation under cooperation. I.e., God preserves creatures
in existence, not by simply conserving static substance but by cooperating with the
dynamics which constitute material entities (cf. E = mc^2). IF that is the case then
for God to cease cooperating with natural processes altogether would mean to cease
preserving creation, which would then cease to exist.

> I do not know if immaterial angels can
> make bicycles, but my point is that the creative aspect of man is very
> peculiar to man, which is distinct from that of any other part of creation
> and is akin to God's. The ability to reason and thus to create is what I
> understand to being created in the image of God. No animal can claim that
> and the transition can never be continuous as claimed by a pure
> evolutionist.

It may be - as Pope John Paul insisted recently - that there must be some
addition of a soul to the result of biological evolution in order for genuine humanity
to come into being, but I see no reason to assume that. The evolution of consciousness,
linguistic ability, & capability for intelligent communication - including "hearing" &
understanding God's Word - may have been a process as "natural" as any other (&, like
all other, one with which God cooperated). It may, however, not have been _continuous_.
I think that Teilhard's analogy of a phase change in connection with the origin of
consciousness - or for that matter, of life - has a good deal to recommend it. When you
turn on the burner under a pot of water, energy is put into the system continuously, but
you don't see any change until - at 373K - there is a jump from liquid to gas phase.
I think that _homo sapiens_ (& other intelligent species if they exist) are the
material universe become conscious of itself & able to (inter alia) make bicycles. &
that development is preparation for the Incarnation & the accomplishment of the "plan"
spoken of in Ephesians 1:10.
Shalom,
George

George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/