Re: Cross & ID

1st, the contingency of the universe is an expression of God's freedom in creating the universe. To the extent that the contingency isn't "pure" then there is some limitation on divine freedom. That can be (at least if one wants to be orthodox) only if it is a limitation which God himself imposes. In any case, the statement about "contingent rationality" means (a) that God could have created other universes which were rational in different ways & (b) in creating our universe God did not create a completely chaotic world - e.g., Is.45:18.

2d, I think that the term "panentheism" has been used too broadly to be very useful. It's typically connected with process theology but isn't limited to that. In its basic etymological sense that all is in God it could be understood as a traditional Christian claim - e.g., Acts 17:28. But it usually has other connotations & for that reason I don't use it much, especially in connection with my own views.

3d, I'm afraid I can't answer your last question because I'm not sure what it means. God did not have to create at all - any universe of any kind. The universe that is exists in dependence upon God and ultimately upon God alone. That is the fundamental meaning of creatio ex nihilo, & is a crucial way in which traditional Christian thought differs from that of process theology. (It's worth noting, however, that the Jesuit theologian Joseph Bracken has tried to express creatio ex nihilo in terms of process thought - cf. a recent article of his in dialog which I can't put my hands on right now.) The universe does, however, have its own integrity & relative autonomy - i.e., it is not an emanation from God. God has created something that is not God.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Janice Matchett
  To: George Murphy ; David Opderbeck
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 2:30 PM
  Subject: Re: Cross & ID

  At 01:33 PM 1/3/2006, George Murphy wrote:

    Janice -
     
    The correction that you welcome is that you are way off base. I don't feel required to list all the wrong guesses here & would only urge others not to regard what you've said as an accurate description of my views. I do accept what Thomas Torrance (a fairly conservative Reformed theologian) has called "the doctrine of the contingent rationality of the universe" - an idea that is, BTW, included in the ASA Statement of Faith. But why anyone would think that that has anything to do with New Age thought I cannot imagine. Denial of it implies a denial of the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo in its basic sense.
     
    I suggest that you read some substantive pieces that I've written in the area of theology and science before you start speculating about what I think. I've mentioned some previously in this thread & you can find others listed in the bibilography at my website - or at the ASA one for PSCF.
     
    Shalom
    George
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

  ## Not to get tooooo picky, but would you add the word "purely" to contingent?

  I apologize - seeing that I mistakenly typed, "pantheism", when I meant to type "panentheism" -- even though panentheism agrees with pantheism in rejecting the belief that the world is a purely contingent creation of a deity who could have existed apart from this or any other world.

  Would you say you'd agree with this statement?: "Although God is distinct from the world and our particular world exists contingently, the existence of a world of finite entities ­ some world or other ­ is as fully natural as is the existence of God."
Received on Tue Jan 3 15:01:38 2006