> As a PC I am certainly not wishing to deny God "a certain
> amount of freedom, analogous to human freedom" in governing His
> cosmos. But does not TE in effect deny God *the freedom to intervene*
> in His cosmos, beyond the boundaries of His normal self-limitation?
Answer: definitely not.
Question: Does PC deny God *the freedom to design* His cosmos with
certain intrinsic properties?
You see, we can play those rhetorical games both ways.
But I know that the answer to that question is "no," so
let's get beyond such questions.
Sometimes, TE's choose their arguments poorly and use language which
borders near deism. That can create the impression of "denying God
freedom to intervene." Likewise, PC's sometimes choose their arguments
poorly and use the language of "puncuated naturalism" (the subject of
another post). These are simply poor arguments which create the wrong
impression; they are not NECESSARY parts of TE or PC.
At their best, both PC and TE are _provisional_ statements. Both should
be phrased, and argued, as statements about what we think God _chose_ to
do (rather than what he _must_ have done), based upon evidence to date,
and subject to revision with new evidence.
Loren Haarsma