Van Till's Ultimate Gap

From: Josh Bembenek (
Date: Wed Sep 03 2003 - 01:42:25 EDT

  • Next message: Iain Strachan: "Re: Van Till's Ultimate Gap"

    Just a quick thought that I'd like some feedback on. Many on this list have
    expressed dismay over IDers usage of God's "hand-like" action as a magic
    wand to use whenever scientists don't understand a particular phenomena. I
    agree that it is fruitful to point out that God never ceases to act in
    sustaining Creation and that such rhetorical strategy implies unintelligent
    creation when natural mechanisms are found to account for such phenomena.
    However, I wonder if this same problem exists for the fully-gifted creation
    viewpoint? What makes us think that the origin of space time and the
    derivation of matter, energy and all of the universe is simply a gap in our
    understanding that some future naturalistic discovery won't elegantly
    explain, again making the "God Hypothesis" obsolete? Perhaps I should
    remember some discussion of this in some article, but its not coming to me.
    I don't care to defend my idea by trying to give any explanation for a
    naturalistic origin of space-time. Besides for those here, isn't it
    sufficient enough to hypothesize that a naturalistic explanation is out
    there awaiting our discovery instead of "jumping the gun" and prematurely
    attributing creation to the act of God before all explanations are fully
    explored? The Big Bang Hypothesis is younger than evolution isn't it? I'm
    not looking for a drawn out debate, just some thoughtful considerations.


    Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Sep 03 2003 - 01:45:20 EDT