Re: Evolution and Salvation

From: richard@biblewheel.com
Date: Wed Sep 17 2003 - 12:46:17 EDT

  • Next message: Robert Schneider: "Re: Post-Empiricism Science: A little surprised"

    Howard wrote:

    > I think Douglas is right on target here. Given what I have been calling
    the
    > "authentic contingencies" that permeate the universe's formational
    history,
    > I see no way to defend the proposition that the appearance of our
    particular
    > species -- Homo sapiens -- was inevitable. For theological reasons,
    however,
    > I assume that the appearance some (one or more) species of God-aware and
    > morally responsible creatures was intended from the outset.

    Thanks to Jim, Douglas, and Howard for the replies. I did a little research
    and found that many of the obvious strengths and weaknesses of the RFEP have
    been under discussion on ASA for a number of years. I imagine that Howard
    must be rather weary of repeating himself, considering he lamented of such
    in a post from 1999! http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/199904/0284.html.

    In any case, I would like to pursue this particular wrinkle, that the
    specific formation of the Homo sapiens, or of any individual species for
    that matter, was not specifically created by God but resulted from
    "authentic contingencies" operating within God's fully gifted creation. I
    believe this forces a radical revisioning of the Christian God.

    It seems now that I am unable to assert not only that God formed *me* in the
    womb, but I can not even assert that he formed the species of which I am a
    member! My very existence, and most if not all of the primary aspects of it,
    are now the result of *authentic contingencies* and not the direct result of
    the purposive creative act of a personal loving God.

    Granted - human existence has always *appeared* to be contingent on the
    grossest elements of creation, such as alcohol, lust, and dim lights. But
    the Christian faith sees through this haze and recognizes the purposive and
    personal Hand of God in all these things.

    It appears God is no longer an *authentic agent* in creation, he remains
    only as the Ground of Being or some such transcendent aspect. In the post
    cited above, Howard argued strongly against the charge that the RFEP "smacks
    of deism" and asserted (in all caps no less!) that "GOD IS STILL AS FREE AS
    EVER TO ACT IN ANY WAY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH GOD'S NATURE AND WILL."

    Well, that was back in 1999. Now Howard is asserting that he sees "no way to
    defend the proposition that the appearance of our particular species -- Homo
    sapiens -- was inevitable." This means one of two things:

    1) God is not free to create as he would. He couldn't create Homo sapiens
    even if he wanted to (!) but would have to keep throwing the dice until the
    authentic contingencies produced a species sufficiently approximating his
    desire for him to settle on it as "good enough."

    - or -

    2) Purposive acts like the creation of a specific kind of creature is
    inconsistent with the nature of God.

    This seems to be HUGE problem.

    The fully gifted creation, full of authentic contingencies, looks like a
    field of wild grapes far removed from a Vineyard planted and tended by the
    Lord. Indeed, now it seems like the title "Lord" must be tossed in the
    dustbin of utter meaninglessness! How can the Lord be lord of anything in
    the fully gifted creation where authentic contingency - aka chaos - actually
    rules?

    I'm sure you have pondered these serious questions. I am especially curious
    as to know how the RFEP handles ideas of Prophecy and the Resurrection of
    Christ.

    Finally, I would like to remind people that arguments against the
    significance of the Bible Wheel are typically based on the apparent
    contingencies in the natural history of the formation of the Canon. The
    irony is that this fits perfectly with the RFEP assertion that God's actions
    are seamlessly integrated with all natural phenomena.

    Traditional Christian Theology, on the other hand, should expect (or at
    least shouldn't be surprised), to find such structures in the Divine Logos.

    In either case, there is no warrant for rejecting the Bible Wheel out of
    hand.

    In service of the everlasting Word of God,

    Richard
    Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at
    http://www.BibleWheel.com



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Sep 17 2003 - 12:42:29 EDT