--------------- Text of forwarded message ---------------
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 22:53:42
To: "Glenn R. Morton" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: "John P. McKiness" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: >Re: intell. des. and Berra's folly
At 01:19 PM 6/6/98 -0500, Glenn wrote:
>At 09:14 AM 6/6/98 -0500, John P. McKiness wrote:
>>My question is why must we accept that God determined the outcome?
>>To me He seems to prefer to work _with_ what He has available and He knows
>>the outcome. In my opinion this is a better model of how God can be
>>sovereign and yet allow His creation freedom to exist and allow Adam the
>>choice to reject Him.
>I am not sure there is a big difference between us on this, John. If God
>can't determine the outcome, then I don't see how he could KNOW the outcome
>in advance. And if God, as creator, knows the outcome of a given event,
>then in some real sense He controlled it because he made everything we see.
>I would also cite the use of chance and lots to chose disciples and make
>decisions in the Scripture as evidence that God not only does know the
>outcome He controls it.
I am not planning on going any further with this, but I think there is a big
difference between us, as all our past exchanges have shown. I believe that
God is with me at my birth, at present, and at my death -- right now, the
moment of each is the same with Him. He knows the outcome because He is
there at the outcome as He is there at the beginning of the event. We have
no way of knowing how He participates in the cosmos except as He reveals it
through special revelation, which He hasn't done except in Jesus Christ.
God may direct evolution, He may not. He may only accept what it gives Him
and yet He loves His creation and is with each sparrow as it dies. The
assurance of His love through Jesus and His presence in the Holy Spirit is
all we have. Idle speculation based on controversial interpretations of
selected data are not going to help reconcile science and Christian faith.