>From: RDehaan237@aol.com
> I'M OUT OF MY DEPTH HERE, BUT I STILL DISAGREE. I FALL BACK ON SYSTEMS
> THEORY IN WHICH THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG THE ELEMENTS IN THE SYSTEM ARE AS
> IMPORTANT, IF NOT MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE "CHARACTER" OF THE ELEMENTS. IN
> THIS WAY OF THINKING, THE CHARACTER OF THE BRICKS IN DIFFERENT STRUCTURES,
> FOR INSTANCE, IS NOT AS IMPORTANT AS HOW THEY ARE RELATED TO EACH OTHER -- IN
> THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BRICK WALL, A GARAGE, OR A MAGNIFICENT CHURCH. BY
> BEING RELATED TO EACH OTHER IN DIFFERENT WAYS IDENTICAL BRICKS CAN BE USED TO
> BUILD VERY DIFFERENT STRUCTURES.
Quite correct; I see no reason to disagree with your comments on bricks.
But the arranging of bricks (by an agent external to the system of bricks,
placing them -- without their active participation -- in some particular
configuration) is a radically different situation than the self-arranging of
atoms or molecules by the exercise of their own formational capabilities.
The structure of the molecules formed by the interaction of atoms is
determined by the nature of the atoms and the character of their
interaction. The form of a brick wall or garage or church, on the other
hand, is imposed by the bricklayer.
> I'LL STICK MY NECK OUT NOW. LIKEWISE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS LINE OF
> THINKING, A CARBON ATOM, WHICH IS A VERY VERSATILE ATOM, IS UNCHANGED IN
> CHARACTER WHETHER IT IS FOUND IN A BLOCK OF ANTHRACITE, OR IN MY BODY. TO BE
> SURE, A DIFFERENT PART OF ITS VERSATILITY IS UTILIZED IN COAL, FROM THE
> VERSATILITY USED IN A LIVING ORGANISM. OR ARE YOU SAYING THAT A CARBON ATOM
> IN MY BODY IS DIFFERENT _IN CHARACTER_ FOR BEING PART OF A LIVING ORGANISM
> FROM A CARBON ATOM IN A NONLIVING, INANIMATE OBJECT?
No. Carbon atoms have the same (extremely versatile) character no matter
where they are.
Once again, we seem to have a communication barrier. I would say that carbon
atoms have the capabilities to combine (by active interaction, not by being
placed there by some other agent) with each other and with other atoms to
form (by the exercise of their formational capabilities) a rich variety of
configurations. molecules, etc. These formational capabilities are part and
parcel of the _being_ of carbon atoms. What carbon atoms _are_ and what
carbon atoms _are able to do_ are a "package deal."
..skip a lot...
> HOWARD: <It's clear that our judgments differ here. Yes, I do indeed have
> high
> expectations of the system of "natural" (God-given) formational capabilities
> resident is the Creation.>
>
> BOB: I'M NOT GOING TO SURRENDER THE HIGH GROUND HERE. A STAGED
> DEVELOPMENTAL MODEL OF CREATION HAS FULLY AS HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR CREATION
> AS YOUR "SYSTEM OF "NATURAL" (GOD-GIVEN) FORMATIONAL CAPABILITIES RESIDENT IN
> CREATION." FOR INSTANCE, YOU AND I HAD HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR THE FULL
> DEVELOPMENT OF OUR INFANT CHILDREN INTO MATURE ADULTS WHEN THEY WERE BORN
> EVEN THOUGH WE FULLY EXPECTED TO HAVE TO MAKE INTERVENTIONS FROM TIME TO TIME
> IN ORDER FOR THOSE EXPECTATIONS TO BE REALIZED.
Our difference seems to be that your model of the Creation's formational
history is one in which divine intervention plays a key role, as in the
transitions from stage to stage ("kicking it into overdrive" from time to
time). I prefer a model in which non-coercive divine action is essential to
the whole process, but in which occasional divine intervention is either
unnecessary (as in the "fully-gifted Creation perspective) or proscribed by
the very nature of God and the God-world relationship (as in process
theology or naturalistic theism).
> HOWARD: <What I have been trying to do in our conversation is to understand
> your
> proposal better, especially what kinds of non-natural _divine action_ you
> are have in mind as the links between the "stages" you have proposed.>
>
>
> BOB: I'VE GIVEN IT MY BEST SHOT AS OF NOW. I RESPECT YOUR EFFORT, AND HAVE
> BEEN PLEASED THAT WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO "SPEAK THE TRUTH IN LOVE" TO EACH
> OTHER AS WE SEE IT. YOU MAY HAVE HE LAST WORD, IF YOU WISH.
Thanks, Bob. Let's join in thanking God for the daily sense of God's
strengthening presence that enables us to deal with the realities of our
human experience.
Howard Van Till
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 21 2001 - 09:13:42 EST