>Stephen writes
>
>>Ultimately, for me at least, PC is more in harmony with the
>>interventionist God of the Bible. God is One who intervenes in human
>>history at strategic points, therefore I assume He also intervened in
>>biological history at strategic point.
>
>I think you have a non sequiter here. God intervenes in human history
>because it suits His purposes. If He can accomplish His purposes in
>biological history without intervening, then I presume He wouldn't.
>
I tend to agree with Bill on this. Suppose we rearranged Bill's idea
slightly ;-) to say "If He can accomplish His purposes in human history
without intervening, then I presume He wouldn't". What do you think?
I think this is most likely the case. God intervenes in human history
because man's rebellion throws his plans off course. Man rebels because
of his free will. Can nature rebel, necessitating God's intervention?
Thus, I think the analogy between God's intervention in human and natural
history is very weak.
==
Brian Harper |
Associate Professor | "It is not certain that all is uncertain,
Applied Mechanics | to the glory of skepticism" -- Pascal
Ohio State University |