I think part of the problem is the ambiguity of "cause." There is the
cause-effect chain, in which each effect is the cause of the next effect.
This is the area of secondary causes, all that science can investigate.
There is the first cause, which cannot be in a chain, for it strictly
initiates matters and, within theism, depends solely on the freedom of
the First Cause. Then, to dive into a controversial area, there is the
matter of causation based on human free will. Like it or not, there is a
kind of break when a stimulus/cause produces a human reaction. But this
is interpreted as simply a set of causes too complex for immediate
analysis by those devoted to metaphysical naturalism.
I have used "causal chain" because it is the usual locution. However,
causality involves a multiple array of processes or states or whatever (a
further area of dispute). For example, one may say that flipping a switch
will cause that bulb to glow. This may be considered the precipitating
step. But there are a host of tacit assumptions about causes involved:
that it's the right switch, that the bulb hasn't burnt out, that the
fuses or breakers are connecting, that the generator is working, that the
distribution system is functional, etc., etc. This is so complex that I
hold that seldom if ever do we present the total causal nexus for a
phenomenon.
Dave
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 09:01:37 -0800 (PST) Bill Green
<wgreen82004@yahoo.com> writes:
Thanks for all of your input, floks, but I remain confused about the
issue.
In what sense is God the cause of all natural processes?
Is there a causal link between God and natural processes?
Thanks,
Bill Green
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jan 10 17:37:09 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jan 10 2007 - 17:37:09 EST