Reflectorites
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 20:09:44 -0700, billwald@juno.com wrote:
[...]
>SJ>May I ask if Bill rules out God intervening at strategic
>>points in natural history? For example, the origin of life, the origin
>>of new designs, the origin of humans?
BW>There is high probability that God intervenes in natural history but I
>think he does it by powerful applications of the wonderful physical
>relationships he has built into this universe - using powers and
>techniques we don't understand. If this universe is a reflection of God's
>perfection and his best shot at universe-creating <G> then to suspend or
>countermand the physical constants and relationships is less than perfect
>and thus sin. In other words, I don't believe God does magic tricks.
First, "powerful applications of the wonderful physical relationships he has
built into this universe" is not intervening. "Intervene" literally means
"coming in between". An example in human history would be God's
intervention in the supernatural call to Abraham, God's speaking to Moses
through a burning bush, and above all the supernatural birth, miracles
and resurrection of Jesus.
Second, it is begging the question to say that God's intervention is
necessarily to "suspend or countermand the physical constants and
relationships". God could have *planned* to intervene further down the
track when things were ready. For example, Rev 13:8 calls Jesus "the
Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world". That is, God planned
to intervene down the track in human history in the Incarnation of Jesus,
from the very beginning. Indeed it is good engineering design to build in only
what's necessary at the beginning and intervene later down the track to
add more information/functionality. NASA does this with space probes. If
NASA tried to build everything in at the beginning, so that further adjustments
from the mission controllers were not necessary, the space probes would be
vastly more complex than they needed to be and hence more wasteful of
resources and likely to go wrong.
Third, "magic tricks" are either false or occult miracles. God's miracles by
definition are the real thing.
So I ask Bill again, if he "rules out God intervening at strategic points in
natural history? For example, the origin of life, the origin of new designs,
the origin of humans?"
SJ>"...By this, Popper means only that the history of
>living organisms and their transformations on Earth are a specific sequence of
>unique events, no different from, say, the history of England. Since it
>is a unique sequence, no generalities can be constructed about it." (Lewontin
>R.C., "Testing the Theory of Natural Selection," ..., Nature,
>Vol. 236, March 24, 1972, p.181).
BW>I agree 100%. Darwinism, as well as creationism, are metaphysical
>systems.
So what? The view that "Darwinism, as well as creationism, are
metaphysical systems" is itself grounded in a metaphysical system. We can't
avoid metaphysical systems. The question then is, is it a *true*
metaphysical system?
Since "Darwinism" is the dominant metaphysical system in State-funded
schools and universities and "creationism" has been marginalised out of the
same, does Bill claim that "Darwinism" is a true metaphysical system and
"creationism" is a false metaphysical system?
BW>As Jesus said, "Sometimes stuff just happens," Luke 13:4, billwald
>paraphrase.
For starters, Lk 13:4 does not say that "Sometimes stuff just happens". It
says that: "Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on
them--do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in
Jerusalem?" The context indicates that Jesus was answering a question
about the relationship between individual human sin and suffering. Jesus
answered that there is not necessarily a direct causal link between an
individual's sin and the evil he/she suffers.
On the question of whether "Sometimes stuff just happens", Jesus actually
said that nothing "just happens" but that everything, down to the very
smallest and insignificant thing, is ultimately willed by God:
"Are not two sparrows sold for a penny ? Yet not one of them will fall to
the ground apart from the will of your Father." (Mt 10:29).
[...]
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Neither, lastly, would our observer be driven out of his conclusion, or
from his confidence in its truth, by being told that he knew nothing at all
about the matter. He knows enough for his argument. He knows the utility
of the end: he knows the subserviency and adaptation of the means to the
end. These points being known, his ignorance of other points, his doubts
concerning other points, affect not the certainty of his reasoning. The
consciousness of knowing little, need not beget a distrust of that which he
does know." (Paley W., "Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence
and Attributes of the Deity, Collected from the Appearances of Nature,"
[1802], St. Thomas Press: Houston TX, 1972, reprint, pp.5-6)
Stephen E. Jones | sejones@iinet.net.au | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 19 2000 - 17:37:11 EDT