In a message dated 8/27/01 11:16:46 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
gmurphy@raex.com writes:
<< Some of Pascal's notes relevant to the question of natural theology
are as follows:
It is a remarkable thing that no canonical writer ever used nature as a
proof of God's existence. All set out to convince us of it. But David,
Solomon, and the rest never said: 'There is no void; therefore there is
a God.' They must have been cleverer than the cleverest of their
successors, every one of whom has used this argument. The fact is worth
pondering on.
If it is a sign of weakness to have used nature as a proof of God, do
not despise Scripture for it; if it is a sign of strength to have
recognized these contradictions, give Scripture the credit for it.
What meets our eyes denotes neither a total absence nor a manifest
presence of the divine, but the presence of a God who conceals himself.
Everything bears this stamp.
These are, respectively, #s 6 and 7 on p.32 and # 602 on p.222
of the Penguin edition of The Pensees.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
"The Science-Theology Interface"
>>
In addition to the quotes George has cited, I would add:
"If he had wished to overcome the obstinacy of the most hardened, he could
have done so by revealing himself to them so plainly that they could not
doubt the truth of his essence, as he will appear on the last day with such
thunder and lightning and such convulsions of nature that the dead will rise
up and the blindest will see him. This is not the way he wished to appear
when he came in mildness, because so many men had shown themselves unworthy
of his clemency, that he wished to deprive them of the good they did not
desire. It was therefore not right that he should appear in a manner
manifestly divine and absolutely capable of convincing all men, but neither
was it right that that his coming should be so hidden that he could not be
recognized by those who sincerely sought him. He wished to make himself
perfectly recognizable to them. Thus wishing to appear openly to those who
seek him with all their heart and hidden from those who shun him with all
their heart, he has qualified our knowledge of him by giving signs which can
be seen by those who seek him and not by those who do not.
There is enough light for those who desire only to see, and enough darkness
for those of a contrary disposition" [part of #149, p. 79-80, Penguin edition]
"And that is why I shall not undertake here to prove by reasons from nature
either the existence of God, or the Trinity or the immortality of the soul,
or anything of that kind: not just because I should not feel competent to
find in nature arguments which would convince hardened atheists, but also
because such knowledge, without Christ, is useless and sterile. Evin if
someone were convinced that the proportions between numbers are immaterial,
eternal truths, depending on a first truth in which they subsist, called God,
I should not consider that he had made much progress towards his salvation."
[part of #449, p. 169, Penguin edition]
The first quote speaks to the idea of argument TO design versus argument FROM
design (as D. Livingstone has argued) or dependent versus independent natural
theology (as George Murphy--following T. Torrance--has emphasized).
The second quote speaks to the point that has been repeatedly made on this
list and emphasized by George M. is his PSCF article of about a year ago.
By the way, my apologies for not responding after comments on my post. After
sending the message, I was offline for about a week. I'm just getting back.
Also, Michael Roberts message was difficult for me to unscramble from the
archive, but I think he was making the point that much "common knowledge" of
Paley is incorrect. However, in this case Darwin seems to have understood
Paley in the commonly accepted way. In this case, how Paley was read and
interpreted by Darwin has been more important for subsequent history than
whatever Paley "really" meant. [That, at least, is a legitimate point made
by the deconstructionist/poststructuralist crowd.)
Karl
******************************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 04 2001 - 23:19:12 EDT