Re: [asa] evidence for design

There are several places in the NT that state or suggest Christ's followers will be able to do great works. Most notable is John 14:12, where Jesus tells his disciples, "The one believing in me, he also will do the works that I do, and greater than these will he do..." (literal, stilted translation). This passage has had many interpretations, which often conclude--among old-line Protestants, and without any compelling biblical suppport--that the kind of spectacular miracles we associate with Jesus and some apostles were intended only for the early Church and are not to be expected in later ages.

Any such "works," however, as a rule are quite distinct in character from the amazing works of modern humans. To oversimplify, the former works were done by invoking God and were intended to reinforce the good news of Christ; the latter works have been done explicitly through human ingenuity and have the immediate effect of showcasing human competence without reference to God.

A reason I don't think Gen. 1:26ff is all that relevant to modern human achievements is that in Gen. 11, relative to the tower of Babel, we hear God saying, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them..." (NIV). Whereupon God stops them in their tracks by messing up their ability to communicate with one another. The amazing works of science & technology have largely come through a high level of human collaboration, the thing God explicitly put a stop to in Gen. 11. So, interpreting Gen. 1:26ff by Gen. 11, I conclude that God did not have modern scientific achievements in mind when he instructed humans to dominate the world. These days we're building the equivalent of the tower of Babel hundreds of times over.

Nevertheless I firmly believe that God actually did intend at the outset that we dominate in the way we now do. I also believe that human accomplishments showcase the power of God whether or not he's acknowledged. It's just that one can't take much of anything in those first eleven chapters of Genesis to apply straightforwardly to modern humans.

Don

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Schwarzwald<mailto:schwarzwald@gmail.com>
  To: asa@calvin.edu<mailto:asa@calvin.edu>
  Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 12:10 AM
  Subject: Re: [asa] evidence for design

  I'd have more to say about this, however, one thing has struck me. In the NT, aren't there multiple places where it's mentioned that humans will work 'miracles'?

  On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Don Winterstein <dfwinterstein@msn.com<mailto:dfwinterstein@msn.com>> wrote:

    Yesterday I wrote: "The witness of the fossils as humans interpret them ... is that all results are haphazard in the sense that they convey no evidence of having been desired by an intelligent being."

    The long and convoluted history of organic evolution gives no evidence that an intelligent being was in control. (There is an exception.) If this big picture of Earth's organisms contains no evidence of intelligent design, why should we expect to find evidence for intelligent design in organisms at the microscopic level? ID students have focused on microscopic things like bacterial flagella and blood clotting mechanisms. If some being has been designing organisms in our world and leaving evidence of it, why wouldn't the evidence more readily show up at the macro scale than at the micro scale? If there's none at the macro scale, why expect any at the micro scale?

    Fine tuning of the universe can be taken as evidence of design at a different kind of macro scale and has become fairly convincing to many.

    But the most convincing evidence that an intelligent being has been in control is: us, humanity. Not any old humanity, but modern humanity. Modern humans collectively have accomplished such feats of knowledge, understanding and control of themselves and the world that no one should be able to believe this monumental achievement was not deliberately intended at the outset. Arguments from fine tuning of the universe are good, but if we can step back from ourselves a bit for perspective, our own collective accomplishments should be far more persuasive that we were designed, we were intended. There's no reason to think anything arising spontaneously from inert matter should be able to gain awareness, understanding and control of itself and of the world. Yet it is the degree to which we've done such things that is most impressive and convincing. Collectively we have become some version of God.

    A reasonable conclusion is that God intended us at the outset to collectively gain mastery. Despite Gen. 1:26, biblical teaching does not seem to anticipate this kind of mastery. The emphasis of NT teaching is such that we can legitimately say our mastery has come despite such teaching rather than because of it. If God intended that humanity achieve such mastery, the NT with its emphasis on sin and repentance, on spiritual knowledge of God and humans and on preparation for the afterlife has not told the whole story.

    An alternative is that what humanity has accomplished has been done out of hubris in defiance of God and will receive his condemnation. I suspect none of us can believe this.

    Don

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Feb 2 03:15:23 2009