Re: [asa] Random and design

At 12:32 PM 11/23/2006, Terry M. Gray wrote:

>On Nov 22, 2006, at 2:34 AM, Don Winterstein wrote:
>>
>>I don't see it that way. I understand that you are contending
>>that, in order for God to foreknow his people, he must foreknow in
>>full detail all events that lead to his people, including the QM
>>choices that every particle in the sequence makes, all the way from
>>the big bang. That gives me a headache just thinking about it. I
>>would hope that God would have better things to do with his
>>cognitive apparatus--whatever it is--than store all this info. ~ Don
>
>I'm always amazed in these discussions with lines like the last two
>sentences in the paragraph above. First, it should give you a
>headache if you try to think like God. Of course, you can't do
>it--or else you would be God. Your last sentence suggests that you
>think that God is something like you and that he thinks and acts
>like you. At best, your God is too small. At worst, you are making
>God after your own image or at least after the image of very smart
>people that you know.
>
>God "effortlessly" is omniscience, omnipotent, omnipresent,
>infinite, eternal, all-wise, all-good, etc. Only mild apologies to
>those who object to the "Greek" thinking here. I'm convinced that
>the Hebrew scriptures teach each of these concepts without
>necessarily using the theological words. If God is omniscient,
>etc., then ideas like "cognitive apparatus" and "better things to
>do" just don't make sense. ~ TG

@ More "amazing" lines:

It is vital that ASA as an organization be neither pro-YEC nor
anti-YEC, neither pro-ID nor anti-ID, neither pro-TE nor anti-TE (or
substitute your favorite acronym or position). Rather we are
pro-Creator/Christian faith and anti-atheism/philosophical
materialism. ... we must challenge and encourage everyone to meet
high standards of "fidelity to the Word of God" and "integrity in
science".... ~ Randy Isaac - Tue, 20 Dec 2005 Re: ASA's "neutrality policy"

".... words become the Word of God if and only if they actually
affect people. Words sitting unread in a book are hence not the Word
of God, even though at one time those words may have been the Word of
God to some individual or group. When those same words affect people
who read them today, they may become the Word of God to those
people. If, on the other hand, they go in one ear and out the other,
they have not become the Word of God. If the words are not "living
and active," they are not the Word of God but merely words. It's
subjective. The Word of God is not an object but a power, a
force. ~ Don Winterstein Thu, 1 Jun 2006 05:25:11 -0700 Subj: Re:
A profound disturbance found in Yak butter.

:)

~ Janice

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 23 13:13:29 2006