Re: Divine vs creaturely action

From: John W Burgeson (
Date: Tue Jun 19 2001 - 09:39:07 EDT

  • Next message: Terry M. Gray: "Re: Divine vs creaturely action"

    Terry posted: "In general, I think creature vs. Creator is a much more
    helpful distinction. Free agency is not unique to God. However, one
    wonders where to put the activity of angels and demonic spirits. These
    agents are creaturely yet I suspect that we might call their activity

    I have tended away from supernatural vs. natural in favor of regular vs.
    irregular or ordinary vs. extraordinary."

    While I agree that the term "supernatural" is loaded," I continue to
    think we need SOME sort of language in which to assert that we human
    beings do, at least sometimes, violate natural causality when we make
    decisions in which some thought is involved. Neither you nor Howard like
    the word "supernaturalism" but in avoiding its use the concept of
    "breaking into the causal nexus of the universe" (Griffin's terminology)
    is glossed over and ignored.

    I wish there were another term -- "extra-natural" comes close, but seems
    contrived. Maybe someone here can suggest one.

    I had forgotten to include the angels/demons possibility, so my
    definitions must be expanded to the following:

    sn(d) (divine; God of orthodox Christianity)
    sn(o) (divine; God of Open Theism)
    sn(p) (divine; God of Process Theology)
    sn(a) (angels)
    sn(d) (demons)
    sn(h) (humans)
    sn(a) (animals)
    sn(i) (inanimate matter)

    One may argue, of course, that some of the above are null; as a matter of
    fact, only sn(h) can be fairly said to be established; all the others are
    open to argument. I guess even sn(h) is open to argument if your name is
    Sagan, Dawkins or Crick.

    My own belief structure is that sn(h) surely is true; sn(i) is surely not
    true. My jury is out on the other categories, except to say that some
    variation of sn(d), sn(o) and sn(p) must certainly be true, with my
    position being one that sn(d) seems the most credible.

    John Burgeson (Burgy)
           (data on science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
            humor, great cars, God's intervention into natural causation,

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 19 2001 - 10:05:51 EDT