From: Alexanian, Moorad (alexanian@uncw.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 09 2003 - 22:10:12 EDT
An e-mail may be “read” by a purely physical device. However, the true content of the message is not accessible to such a device. It takes another conscious, rational being as the writer to determine the true content of the message. These properties of humans are not accessible to purely physical devices and may be classified as non-physical. I may not need to consult the Holy Spirit to do the reading and writing of messages. However, it may be that our ability, for instance, to discern nature is made possible and does involve the feature of man of being created in the image of God.
Moorad
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of bivalve
Sent: Thu 10/9/2003 8:54 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Cc:
Subject: Methodological naturalism versus philosophical naturalism, from re: Phillip Johnson
Here's an example of the difference. Presumably you are reading this email by using your eyes to read something displayed on a computer. These are natural methods. If you determine the content of this email by consulting a psychic, or by direct revelation by the Holy Spirit, you are not using a natural method.
However, there is nothing about using the natural method that implies that you are an atheist (nor is there anything that an atheist could not do in the natural method). In fact, there are good theological reasons to think that neither of the two non-natural methods that I mentioned are good ideas as techniques for reading email.
In addition, everyday experience and history (including Biblical history) tell us that ordinary, natural events are the vast majority of events. Contrary to Hume, this does not mean that we can therefore assume that every event is natural. However, it does suggest that assuming natural causes is a reasonable first approach to trying to explain something.
Another difficulty with trying to posit supernatural causes in science is that they are unlikely to behave in a regular manner (not to mention the admonition not to put God to the test). It is possible to test whether a horoscope is true, or whether God will save you if you jump off the roof of a tall building, but if the answer is no, these still do not tell us whether mysterious cosmic forces exist or whether God might intervene in certain circumstances.
By natural I do not mean that God is not involved, but rather that He brings the events about following the patterns that we call natural laws.
General regularity in the behavior of creation (aka natural law) is also to be expected theologically. The creation is the product of an orderly God. There are no rival powers or gods that might interupt things. He does not change, nor does He make mistakes that have to be fixed. Furthermore, He made us to rule over creation, and to be good rulers we have to be able to predict the effects of our actions on the creation. Finally, miracles must be exceptional events to be meaningful. The resurrection is impressive only if naturally, people stay dead.
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Oct 09 2003 - 22:12:33 EDT