Re: [asa] Moral law - Francis Collins

--- Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> Likewise, the following seems generally acceptable: "So, for example, to
> say that "God used evolution by natural selection" or even somehow (though we
> can't explain how), "God directed evolution by natural selection", these are
> all basically OK in as much as they appear to be true."
>
> My trouble with the phrase 'God used evolution by NS' is simply that it
> raises up 'evolution' to sound as if God needed/needs it.

I agree. The Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter III says

I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own
will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass;[1] yet so, as
thereby neither is God the author of sin,[2] nor is violence offered to the
will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken
away, but rather established.[3]

Evolution is a secondary cause. While (according to the WCF) God does not
constrain evolution, He established the ground rules under which it operates by
establishing it in the first place.

Would it be the
> same thing to say that 'God makes (/causes) nature (to) change-over-time' or
> 'God uses changes-over-time in selecting natural effects?'

I'm uncomfortable with the first because it raises issues of theodicy that we
can argue about forever and not reach a conclusion. I think the Westminster
Assembly got about as close as anyone can: God does not interfere with the
contingency of secondary causes, BUT He establishes them (and by implication
establishes the rules under which they operate and their limits). The second
gets into the same issues as "God uses evolution" -- as though God found this
process and said "Aha! I'll use it."

>
> I'm a bit unimpressed still by the sloppy metaphor (as Darwin himself
> admitted) of 'natural selection' (though not the strongly defined concept it
> seems most at ASA refer to in community) especially since in my
> scientific/scholarly field it contrasts directly with 'human selection.'
> Selection to me implies agency which many theories of evolution seem to be
> lacking.

Darwin was to some extent inspired by the wide variety of forms achievable by
human breeders through selective breeding. It probably seemed natural to him to
make the analogy between the effects of variations in environment that raise
the need for adaptation and selection.
>

Bill Hamilton
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
248.652.4148 (home) 248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Jan 6 20:01:17 2007