Re: [asa] Romans 1:20

> What has been conspicuously absent from this thread on Rom 1:20 and natural
> revelation is any substantive response to the fact that many secular
> non-religious types like Davies and Hoyle and Flew all infer a designer from
> nature.
>
> Since this is obviously the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of these
> unbelievers working on them in conjunction with the teachings of this
> passage, it should be obvious that it is counterproductive to try to erect a
> theology against it.

Many secular non-religious types and many religious types fail to
infer a designer from nature, and some who do see potential for such
an inference do not accept ID-type claims. The fact that one can
potentially be inspired to belief in a designer from examining nature
does not entail that everyone examining the question ought to arrive
at the same conclusion.

Also, this conclusion of a designer does one no good ultimately unless
it is eventually linked with (or replaced by) faith in Jesus as Savior
and Lord. Many of the errors of ID are linked with the misperception
that atheism versus anything else is the critical issue, when in fact
Wells as a Moonie has no better prospects after death than does
Dawkins.

God can use impressions of design in the physical world to push
someone towards Himself. However, this is different from the claim
that one ought to expect to scientifically detect evidence of design
(whether this is expected on theological or scientific grounds).

-- 
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.