Re: Limits of Methodological naturalism

From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Thu Jul 06 2000 - 08:27:50 EDT

  • Next message: George Murphy: "Re: Involvement in evolution"

    dfsiemensjr@juno.com wrote:
    >
    > On Wed, 5 Jul 2000 16:24:26 -0400 bivalve@email.unc.edu (David Campbell)
    > writes:
    > > >how does one stipulate limitations upon what can be explained by
    > > natural
    > > >causes without either begging the question or drawing boundaries
    > > arbitrarily?
    > >
    > > Metaphysical considerations may provide some boundaries.
    > > Christianity
    > > posits that the resurrection of Christ was supernatural, for
    > > example. If
    > > you believe that the purpose of direct divine action such as the
    > > Biblical
    > > miracles is as a part of special revelation, then there is
    > > theological
    > > reason to not expect direct divine action in general creation.
    > >
    > There is the problem of identifying miracles in connection with natural
    > explanations. There is no natural explanation for the virgin birth or the
    > resurrection of Christ. They form a special class.

             The categories "natural" & "supernatural" are not used in Scripture. That
    doesn't prove that they can't be useful, but care is needed. In my seldom humble
    opinion there is no reason to _insist_ that any given phenomenon was "supernatural" -
    i.e., completely beyond the capacity of natural processes. Whether or not Kessel's
    (Journal of the ASA 38, 129, 1983) explanation of virginal conception is correct or not,
    it shows the possibility of such an explanation, & I have done the same - as an analogy
    rather than an "explanation", corresponding to what Paul does in I Cor.15:35-44 (Works
    5.2, 1, 1995) - with the resurrection.
            Another - & perhaps futile - point. In discussions of this sort the term
    "virginal conception" (virginitas ante partem) rather than "virgin birth"
    (virginitas in partu) really should be used. In popular parlance they mean the same
    thing, but most protestants who say that they "believe in the virgin birth" don't mean
    to affirm that Mary retained her virginity in the process of giving birth - an
    unfortunate notion which has been widely held in some parts of the church.

                                                            Shalom,
                                                            George

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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 06 2000 - 08:30:47 EDT