Re: More fusillades in the ID wars

It is not really "God of the gaps" thinking because I am
not talking about the gaps. My comment was not at all
about how God interacts with the universe, or when.

I was just pointing out that a view of the universe that
does not allow God to interact with his creation
(continuously or occasionally) cannot be Christian. It
can be a theistic view, but is not consistent with
Biblical Christianity.

If it can be reconciled with Christianity in some way that
I dont understand, I would be interested in seeing how.

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 06:40:30 -0600
  Bill Dozier <wddozier@mac.com> wrote:
>On Feb 4, 2005, at 4:57 AM, jack syme wrote:
>
>> If one takes the position that you cant have a creator
>>that tweeks
>> creation from time to time, then I dont see how you can
>>accept
>> Christianity.
>>  
>> There are many 'miracles' and prophecies documented in
>>the Bible, that
>> cannot ocurr through natural processes alone. 
>
>Sorry to have to say this, but this is "God of the gaps"
>thinking.
>
>God does not "tweak" his creation "from time to time." He
>operates it continually; in fact, it only continues to
>exist on a moment-to-moment basis because He wills it to
>be so. As Galileo wrote (no doubt thinking Romans 1), we
>have 2 books in which He has revealed Himself: the Bible
>and the Cosmos.
>
>People seem to think that since we have some
>understanding about some natural processes and can often
>predict their outcome, that God is somehow not involved.
>There is the implicit belief that unless there is a
>"miracle," then God was just letting things take their
>course.
>
>The Bible does not teach that the Universe is autonomous.
>We are not Deists. Yes, God usually causes the Cosmos to
>behave in a predictable, orderly fashion. What would it
>tell us about Him if this were not so? Yes, God has
>acted, "from time to time," when it suits his purpose, in
>a way that deviates from this pattern (i.e., "miracles").
>What would it tell us about Him if this were not so?
>
>To believe that life evolved on Earth does not require
>one to take either of the common positions that I observe
>in this debate (that evolution is an autonomous,
>inevitable result or that evolution is so unlikely that
>it required miracles for it to occur). Wherever the truth
>lies on that spectrum is OK with me.
>
>Bill Dozier
>Minister of Silly Guitar Sounds
>---
>"How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who
>reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an
>anti-communist? It's someone who understands Marx and
>Lenin." -- Ronald Reagan
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 4 08:22:08 2005