Re: >Re: >RE: What does ID mean?
George Murphy (email@example.com)
Fri, 01 May 1998 15:29:28 -0400
Moorad Alexanian wrote:
> At 01:23 PM 4/26/98 -0400, George Murphy wrote: ..........................
> > It seems rather odd to
> >suggest that the fit of a well confirmed mathematical theory like GRT or
> >QED with observation is just an accident which has nothing to do with
> >the way God runs things. The successes of mathematicalal physics
> >strongly suggest that there is a pattern to the interactions which
> >comprise the physical world, and that our laws of physics are
> >approximations to that pattern.
> Dear George,
> The point I am making is that God is not bound to the laws that we use to
> describe nature.
God is not bound by any external necessity, but God can limit
his own actions - & I believe does, for science works "though God were
not given". This is part of God's gift in creation, so that we can
understand the world.
(The scholastic distinction between God's absolute & God's
ordinate power is germane here.)
George L. Murphy