Fw: Naturalism, What does it Mean?

From: Steve Petermann (steve@spetermann.org)
Date: Fri Oct 03 2003 - 12:02:25 EDT

  • Next message: Steve Petermann: "Fw: Naturalism, What does it Mean?"

    George wrote:
    > >All
    > >that terms like "coercive" or "non-coercive" do is to provide
    emotion-laden
    > handles that
    > >are useful for rhetorical purposes. What those who accept MN but reject
    ON
    > need to do
    > >is speak about how they believe God does in fact act in the world.
    >

     I thought terms like "coercive" or "non-coercive" *were* speaking about
    <how
     they believe God does in fact act>. However, while I see your point about
     them being emotion-laden I don't see a way around that problem. The topic
    of
     divine action itself is emotion ladened. Personally I prefer the terms
     "assertive" or "non-assertive". Those aren't quite the same nuance as the
     coercive terms but perhaps less emotional.

     Steve Petermann

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 03 2003 - 12:06:13 EDT