Tue, 16 Dec 1997 15:45:33 -0600 (CST)

You wrote:

I think I will phrase this in terms of 3 statements that people might
make about gaps (where I think we all know more-or-less what we mean by
"gaps" so I won't try to define that precisely), with the question being
which of these qualify as GOG theology:

(A) Gaps in nature appear to exist, and this is evidence for theism.

(B) Gaps in nature appear to exist, and this is foundational to my faith.

(C) If theism is true, there must be gaps in nature (corollary: lack of
gaps implies lack of God).

My response:

I would not think of GOG in terms of A, B, or C. We cannot objectively say
that gaps in nature exist precisely because we are not, like God, all
knowing. That is, we don't know if the gaps exist. Gaps are, therefore,
purely subjective. In my analysis, this then means that folks who use gap
theology are creating a "God of ignorance." They pull God like a white
rabbit out of their hats whenever they can't figure something out (Behe,
Johnson, et al). Trouble is - somebody always figures out the gap later -
so where does God stand then?

Lucy Masters