I'm glad you responded, Stephen. You are focusing on the central idea of my
post, but it appears I lost you partway through. From our previous
conversation:
>EO>Now let's apply this insight.
>>Consider the spontaneous organization of the first functional protein from
>>its constituent components. Let's say God establishes natural laws under
>>which you would expect this to occur on Earth only once every 30 gazillion
>>(or insert your favorite astronomical number) years or so. However, he
>>chooses to allow that extremely improbable event to occur in the first 2
>>billion years of the earth's history.
SJ>We need to clarify exactly what this "chooses to allow" means? If it
>means God works through His established "natural laws" then it should
>still "occur on Earth only once every 30 gazillion...years or so", so
>you are still with TE.
>
>However, if you mean that somehow God over-rode his His established
>"natural laws" then that is PC.
>EO>Thus, looking from a TE perspective, God worked through the natural
>laws
>>that he established to bring about His purposes--he only lets one such event
>>happen every 30 gazillion years and he didn't make any exceptions to the
>>rule.
SJ>Here again is the conundrum. How does God "lets one such event happen
>every 30 gazillion years" and and at the same time "he didn't make any
>exceptions to the rule." If the rule is "only once every 30
>gazillion... years", then choosing to allow it "to occur in the first
>2 billion years of the earth's history" is (if words mean anything),
>making an exception to the rule.
[..deleted rest..]
Let me try again. You're getting hung up on probability and causation.
Let's make our life easier and just talk about rolling a single fair die for
the moment. We expect the probability of rolling a 3 to be 1/6 for a single
roll. All this means is that if we roll the die many times, on average 1/6
(~17%) of the throws will yield a 3. If we roll the die five times without
obtaining a 3, what is the probability of obtaining a 3 on the next roll?
100% or 17%? The probability is still only 17%. We cannot predict the
outcome of individual rolls; the only thing we can say is that ON AVERAGE a
3 will turn up once in a set of six rolls. Sets of six rolls without a 3,
or a sets of six throws with two 3's are less probable, but they're not
impossible. Probabilities are not guarantees (as any gambler can tell
you). :-)
Now, let's say God determines the roll of a fair die. (Pr 16:33) From the
divine perspective, every outcome is predetermined. However, He
predetermines the results in such a way that they appear random (i.e.
unpredictable) to the human observer. We can't tell exactly when a 3 will
turn up. That information is hidden from us. But God does determine the
outcomes in such a way that by averaging the results over many throws, we
can summarize the results into a simple framework--a "natural law". ("For
given set of rolls of the die, the average number of 3's obtained is 1/6th
the total number of rolls.") Natural laws not only allow us to summarize
past results, but also allow us to make predictions about the future
behavior of the die when it is rolled. ("The probability is of obtaining a
3 on the next roll is 1/6" or "if we roll the die thirty times, on AVERAGE
we would obtain five 3's".) Note that a natural law results from God's
action in nature in a consistant fashion. We may not be able to predict the
outcome of the next roll, but the probability of a 3 occuring is the same
today as it was in Pascal's time.
Now let's turn back to TE/PC and my example of the spontaneous generation of
a functional protein. If I understand correctly, TE's maintain that God
could have produced this protein by operating through natural laws alone
(w/o "transcendental" intervention). Now, for the sake of discussion, I set
the probability at a fictitious astronomical 1 in 30 gazillion years. This
means that ON AVERAGE once every 30 gazillion years a functional protein
will spontaneously assemble. It might happen the very first year. Or it
might not happen at all in 32 gazillion years. But if you waited for a long
enough time and recorded all the results that ON AVERAGE once every 30
gazillion years you would see the spontaneous generation of a functional
protein. These observations could be formulated into a natural law. (I'm
assuming we can calculate the probability of spontaneous generation without
waiting around gazillions of years in the same way that we can predict the
probability of the results for rolling a fair die one billion times without
actually performing billions of rolls.) Thus, the spontaneous generation of
a functional protein in would be possible (although highly unlikely) through
the operation of natural laws alone.
Now, let's say that God determines the "random" connection of amino acids
just as he determines the "random" throw of a die. He deliberately
determines the spontaneous generation of a functional protein to occur
within the first 2 billion years (maybe I should have used 1 billion) of
earth's history. This is an extremely improbable occurance. Did He "break
the law"? No. As long as He causes it to occur ON AVERAGE only once every
30 gazillion years, He can sprinkle in spontaneous generations any place
that fits his fancy and still leave the natural law intact. And as long as
He stays within the bounds of natural law, He is invisible to scientific
detection. God directs the entire process, but we can never "catch him in
the act". I guess what I am trying to say is that the infitesimal
perturbations that Bill Hamilton refers to could be hidden below the
detection limits of science in the noise of "random" chance. What you call
an extraordinary improbable coincidence will most likely depend on your
philosphical orientation. An atheistic Darwinist attributes it to sheer
luck; a theistic evolutionist attributes it to God's continous guidance
through natural law; most progressive (and YEC) creationists would attribute
it to a transcendental intervention. It looks to me that this example
really begins to blur the TE/PC boundary. I guess it all depends on how you
define "transcendental" intervention. (see below)
[Definitions of SJ in a thread with L. Haarsma...]
> Theistic evolution - God provided laws and mechanisms of the cosmos
> and life, and started them off, and was continuously involved
> immanently in sustaining, controlling and guiding them through natural
> processes.
>
> Progressive Creation - God provided laws and mechanisms of the cosmos
> and life, and started them off, and was continuously involved
> immanently in sustaining, controlling and guiding them through natural
> processes, and in addition intervened transcendently at strategic
> points to introduce new information and direction.
__________________________________________________________
"Looking back, there's a thread of love and grace
Connecting each line and space I've known" -David Meece
==========================================================
Eddie Gene Olmstead, Jr. Chemistry Department
Asst. Professor of Chemistry Gordon College
Email: olmstead@gordonc.edu 255 Grapevine Road
Phone: (508) 927-2300 Ext. 4393 Wenham, MA 01984