RE: [asa] Random and natural vs intelligence

At times, I think people want to go beyond what our best, present
knowledge allows. In science, the question of the structure of
spacetime may require centuries for its solution. Similarly, the very
notion of entanglement and superposition in quantum mechanics may
require a similar length of time for a true understanding of the
workings on Nature. Now, surely, thinking and talking about how the
Creator interacts with His creation is astronomically more complex than
anything we can think now as a mystery in science. Let us not be so
proud as to think that our created brains can conceive how the whole of
creation came into being. The best we can do it to quote Scripture and,
at times, be satisfied with it since that is the only knowledge we may
have.

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Kirk Bertsche
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 11:27 AM
To: Randy Isaac
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Random and natural vs intelligence

On Nov 5, 2007, at 6:26 PM, Randy Isaac wrote:

This is essentially the same argument that Lee Strobel used on the radio
a few weeks ago when he firmly but respectfully rebuked Francis Collins.
Evolution is inherently random and without guidance and is therefore
mutually exclusive with divine guidance, he said.

But according to Scripture even random events are guided by God (Prov.
16:33). Theologically, there is no such thing as "random" in the sense
of occurring without God's guidance.

It appears that many of our Christian brethren have unwittingly accepted
a deistic worldview; either God acts in an obvious, miraculous manner or
He is completely uninvolved. A sense of God's immanence in the workings
of His creation seems to be missing from their arguments.

Kirk

=

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Nov 6 11:54:01 2007