Re: [asa] Time: God vs. Science

Good points. We seem to have a 'logocentric' (as in 'logarithm' not
'Logos') view of our existence to which we still cling even though we
have finally managed to discard a spatially geocentric concept (in the
linear sense). We now realize the universe has no absolute 'center' in
a normal spatial sense, but we still think that our magnitudes of size
and time are solidly the center of all significant activity when perhaps
our arbitrary location along the logarithm line makes 6 days, a billion
years, or a few seconds, all equally presumptuous from a timeless
perspective. Infinity doesn't just go right or left on a number line,
it also goes both in and out -- i.e. right or left on a log scale --
something I love to ponder when staring at a line segment in geometry
class and thinking that it has as many points on it as a full line.
Another way to look at it is that by zooming in infinitely, the segment
can be turned into a full fledged line blurring the distinction between
the two.

 From constructing a cosmos, to seeing the sparrow fall, to numbering a
hair on the head, --- it's pretty obvious God is not limited to our
normal magnitudes of activity.

--merv

D. F. Siemens, Jr. wrote:
> Bob,
> Taking a cue from Augustine, God wouldn't have taken 6 days either.
> One alternative to instant creation is that God's salvific purpose in
> creation is best met through a long development. Otherwise, he created
> the world in such a way as to deliberately mislead honest
> investigators, or he couldn't get if right at the start and had to
> experiment (like the automotive engineers during the 70s, for
> example), or, as in process theology, he is limited in power or tied
> to the universe and has to try to persuade the "physical" creation to
> come along.
> Dave
>
> On Sun, 5 Nov 2006 22:42:30 -0500 "Robert Schneider"
> <rjschn39@bellsouth.net <mailto:rjschn39@bellsouth.net>> writes:
>
> Pim quotes Dawkins, as follows:
>
> <quote>DAWKINS: I think that's a tremendous cop-out. If God wanted
> to create life and create humans, it would be slightly odd that he
> should choose the extraordinarily roundabout way of waiting for 10
> billion years before life got started and then waiting for another
> 4 billion years until you got human beings capable of worshipping
> and sinning and all the other things religious people are
> interested in.</quote>
> Bob: Oddly, this sounds a lot like an argument that Henry Morris
> used against evolution: God would not wait around for billions of
> years for human beings to evolve. I'm confident that God has
> already answered Morris's. Perhaps some day Dawkins will hear it
> too, after he has gotten over the shock of meeting God.
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon, 06 Nov 2006 07:12:26 -0600