Re: Coercion & Persuasion (Was Re: God acting in creation #4+++

From: george murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2001 - 12:02:08 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: God acting in creation #4+++"

    "Howard J. Van Till" wrote:

    > But what could it mean to speak of
    > 'persuasive' divine action on some biomolecule? To be candid, I find it
    > difficult to get a firm hold on this kind of example. David Ray Griffin will
    > be speaking in west Michigan next November; I expect to ask him about this.

    Howard -
            I'll be interested to hear what Griffin has to say. At the same time it's
    important to remember that - as I noted a couple of days ago on this - that
    "persuasion" and "coercion" in this context are first of all terms of thology, not
    of physics. They are really metaphorical terms to provide some partial elucidation
    of divine action. It probably isn't helpful to try to describe the "causal joint"
    between God and the world with the same kind of detail that a description of the
    interaction between 2 parts of the physical world has. E.g., I think that the
    traditional model of natural processes as instruments which God uses is better than
    the "persuasion" one of process thought, but God's relationship with, e.g., an EM
    field can't be specified as can that between a mechanic and a socket wrench.

    Shalom,

    George

    George L. Murphy
    http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
    "teh Science-Theology Interface"



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Dec 19 2001 - 12:01:07 EST