Re: [asa] Natural theology

"The only reasonable conclusion" - now it's on the table! God is to be subjected to our "reasonable" criteria. N.B., this is not a matter of drawing conclusions from scripture by rational exegesis or from the natural world by rational scientific study, both of which are legitimate activities, but of starting with criteria which we think it "reasonable" for God to obey. It is forcing God into our box - or, in a word, another form of idolatry.

In reality, Romans 1 says that the evidence for God in nature functions to make them (the same "them" to whom this evidence is presented) "without excuse." The notion that it is "similar to the witness of the Holy Spirit in the church age" is utterly without foundation. Yes, the Spirit will condemn sin (Jn.16:8-9) but most important will testify to Christ (Jn.15:26, I Cor.12:3 &c.) Does the bacterial flagellum point to Christ?

& the fact that people without God's historical revelation are "without excuse" for their failure to recognize the true God does not strictly imply that God condemns them. After Paul had appealed to the Athenians' unfocussed sense of God & rather gently rebuked them for their idolatry, he said, "While God has overlooked the times of human ignorance, he now commands all people everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). This provides at least an entree to dealing with the question of the status of people in cultures to whom the gospel has never been brought, such as ancient native Americans. It does not seem to have any relevance to the ID debate, scientism, metaphysical naturalism &c in the west.

Shalom
George
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: John Walley
  To: 'George Murphy' ; mlucid@aol.com ; asa@calvin.edu ; 'Janice Matchett'
  Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 5:51 PM
  Subject: RE: [asa] Natural theology

  But this gets back to Randy's obvious question asked earlier. How could the remote inhabitants of far away places before NT missionaries reached them possibly read these books in the right order?

  I think the only reasonable conclusion is that God intended His natural revelation to be a universal and independent witness for Him in the OT era, similar to the witness of the Holy Spirit in the church age.

  John

  -----Original Message-----
  From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of George Murphy
  Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 5:41 PM
  To: mlucid@aol.com; asa@calvin.edu; Janice Matchett
  Subject: Re: [asa] Natural theology

  The 2 books model is OK but it's important to read them in the right order. Otherwise you're in the position of someone reading The Two Towers before The Fellowship of the Ring: You won't know who the characters are & will get confused about what's going on. My PSCF article "Reading God's Two Books" at http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2006/PSCF3-06Murphy.pdf may be of interest here.

  Shalom
  George
  http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

    ----- Original Message -----

    From: Janice Matchett

    To: mlucid@aol.com ; asa@calvin.edu

    Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 3:59 PM

    Subject: Re: [asa] Natural theology

    At 03:42 PM 11/2/2007, mlucid@aol.com wrote:

    Yeah, I believe I'm a two-booker, myself, Christine. -Mike (Friend of ASA)

    @ Me too.

    ..........................

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 2 20:41:14 2007