Re: Dembski theodicy

>
> First Dembski argues from the position that all perceived "natural evil"
> including not only animal death but natural processes such as earthquakes
> and hurricanes are a consequence of human sin. He further states that this
> is the traditional and orthodox Christian position.
> --
>

Is the Great Red Spot on Jupiter a consequence of human sin? It's a
hurricane-like storm a few times the size of earth. Likewise, it's hard to
find much that's evil about all the earthquakes that require a seismometer
for anyone to know that they happened. I don't deny that "natural evil" is
a difficult issue that needs addressed, but the categorical assigning of
such natural processes to evil is dubious.

I also see a significant problem in the claim that it is _the_ traditional
and orthodox Christian position instead of _a_ traditional and orthodox
position. Of course, Dembski may have been more nuanced than Keith's
summary, but as the Bible doesn't especially discuss natural evil in a
manner suited to provide precise Western philosophical answers, claiming
that one specific position is the Christian view seems ill-founded.

  Dr. David Campbell
> 425 Scientific Collections
> University of Alabama
> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
Received on Thu May 11 14:03:46 2006