Re: [asa] Romans 1:20 (disregard my last post)

On Nov 20, 2007, at 5:38 AM, John Walley wrote:

> Like many terms we use on this list that are potential mires, I will
> admit that is possibly misleading but let me take the opportunity to
> ask the list for clarification then as this has been a curious
> conundrum for me for some time.
>
> How do TE’s technically and accurately differentiate guided
> evolution from the a-theistic evolution of Dawkins? That is the
> distinction I was trying to draw here.
>
> John
>

We don't draw a distinction between them. But, we do it in the same
way the Bible does not draw a distinction between Providence and so-
called "ordinary events", even "random events". For example from 2
Chronicles 18:

> 27 Micaiah declared, "If you ever return safely, the LORD has not
> spoken through me." Then he added, "Mark my words, all you people!"
>
> Ahab Killed at Ramoth Gilead 28 So the king of Israel and
> Jehoshaphat king of Judah went up to Ramoth Gilead. 29 The king of
> Israel said to Jehoshaphat, "I will enter the battle in disguise,
> but you wear your royal robes." So the king of Israel disguised
> himself and went into battle.
> 30 Now the king of Aram had ordered his chariot commanders, "Do not
> fight with anyone, small or great, except the king of Israel." 31
> When the chariot commanders saw Jehoshaphat, they thought, "This is
> the king of Israel." So they turned to attack him, but Jehoshaphat
> cried out, and the LORD helped him. God drew them away from him, 32
> for when the chariot commanders saw that he was not the king of
> Israel, they stopped pursuing him.
>
> 33 But someone drew his bow at random and hit the king of Israel
> between the sections of his armor. The king told the chariot driver,
> "Wheel around and get me out of the fighting. I've been wounded." 34
> All day long the battle raged, and the king of Israel propped
> himself up in his chariot facing the Arameans until evening. Then at
> sunset he died.
>
>

So, by drawing a distinction and in essence denying God guides even
random events, the Intelligent Design Movement denies Scripture and
the providential care of God, just like Richard Dawkins. If Dawkins
was there to observe he would say God didn't do it because it was
"random". The author of Chronicles denies this.

But, IDM just doesn't get this. Note this review of Alister McGrath's
Dawkins Delusion (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2007/november/35.79.html
) and note how the reviewer denies the providence of God:

> While theists can have a variety of legitimate views on life's
> evolution, surely they must maintain that the process involves
> intelligence. So the question is: Can an intelligent being use
> random mutations and natural selection to create? No. This is not a
> theological problem; it is a logical one. The words random and
> natural are meant to exclude intelligence. If God guides which
> mutations happen, the mutations are not random; if God chooses which
> organisms survive so as to guide life's evolution, the selection is
> intelligent rather than natural.
>
> Theistic Darwinists maintain that God was "intimately involved" in
> creation, to use Francis Collins's words. But they also think life
> developed via genuinely random mutations and genuinely natural
> selection. Yet they never explain what God is doing in this process.
> Perhaps there is still room for him to start the whole thing off,
> but this abandons theism for deism.

One could also say that the Bible doesn't explain how God uses random
events to His providential ends. Yet, I don't believe any IDM
proponent would accuse the Bible of abandoning theism for deism. Both
the Bible and evangelical TEs argue for the polar opposite of deism.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Nov 20 09:19:17 2007