Re: [asa] Expelled and ID (ID detection?)

From: David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
Date: Mon Apr 21 2008 - 19:49:37 EDT

Thanks George. I don't have Theological Science handy, but Torrance does at
least understand the creation to reflect God's trinitarian character, what
he calls an "analogia relationalis," doesn't he? Doesn't this go beyond the
cruciform character of creation? I admit I haven't studied Torrance
carefully enough here (much less Barth!) but the quote below from Torrance's
"The Christian Doctrine of God," p. 224, doesn't seem completely inapposite
to the quote I gave from Bonaventure:

"He does not abandon the world to blind chance or impersonal necessity, or
determinst law, far less to irrational and malign forces. On the contrary .
. . God endows it with a creaturely rationality and contingent freedom of
its own which he undergirds and affirms through the freedom of his spirit to
be present within it and realize its relation to himself. Thereby he
correlates its creaturely rationality with his own transcendent Rationality,
and its limited creaturely freedom with his own unlimited freedom."

I guess one difference is that Bonaventure seems to understand the analogia
entis as a necessary aspect of creation -- if God created, then creation
must have certain qualities -- while Torrance is suggesting that creation
has certain qualities not because it must, but because God relates lovingly
to creation and therefore desires for this to be so? Yet, it seems to me we
could still say that Dave C.'s condition 2a could conceivably be satisified
if we assume that the triune God is the creator. (Hopefully this isn't
coming across as too much academish skubala. Someday, Lord willing, I'll
have time to really read Torrance deeply. Beautiful writer, brilliant
mind.).

 On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:20 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:

> In the Fourth Gospel the glory of God is revealed in Jesus' "hour" -
> i.e., in the cross-resurrection event. The heavens do not show us that.
> From the standpoint of faith, however, we can see the mark of the cross on
> creation.
>
> On pp.189 - 190 of *Theological Science* Torrance rejects the *analogia
> entis.*
> **
> I think Barth was speaking a bit (!) too strongly when he called the *analogia
> entis* "the mark of Antichrist." But it's a bad & misleading idea.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
> *To:* George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
> *Cc:* asa@calvin.edu
> *Sent:* Monday, April 21, 2008 5:39 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Expelled and ID (ID detection?)
>
> I think Psalm 19 and Romans 1 say a bit more than just that people should
> be able to know there is a God from the creation. Psalm 19 says the heavens
> declare God's "glory" and that creation "pours forth speach" and "reveals
> knowledge"; Romans 1:20 says the creation displays God's "invisible
> attributes, his eternal power and divine nature."
>
> Isn't there a place for the analogia entis in Torrance's reformulation of
> natural theology?
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:21 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
>
> > Scripture has no natural theology, modest ot otherwise. It suggests,
> > at most, that people should be able to know that there is a God from the
> > creation. But the bare existence of God tells us nothing about the
> > character of God - i.e., what God is like. & that's what the *analogia
> > entis* claims.
> >
> > God's actions in history, culminating in Christ, show us the character
> > of God.
> >
> > Shalom
> > George
> > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > *From:* David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
> > *To:* George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
> > *Cc:* David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com> ; asa@calvin.edu
> > *Sent:* Monday, April 21, 2008 4:15 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: [asa] Expelled and ID (ID detection?)
> >
> > Ah, I knew we'd hear the Lutheran critique! :-)
> >
> > I wouldn't say the analogia entis is purely speculative -- it seems to
> > me to reflect scripture's own modest natural theology (Ps. 119, Rom. 1:20)
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 4:08 PM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The *analogia entis* is purely speculative - there is no reason to
> > > think that the creation has to resemble the creator. To put it in terms of
> > > the two books metaphor, the "book of nature" tells us about nature, not the
> > > author of nature. Ezra Pound's quip is relevant: "You can spot the the bad
> > > critic when he starts by discussing the poet and not the poem."
> > >
> > > Shalom
> > > George
> > > http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > *From:* David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com>
> > > *To:* David Campbell <pleuronaia@gmail.com>
> > > *Cc:* asa@calvin.edu
> > > *Sent:* Monday, April 21, 2008 12:56 PM
> > > *Subject:* Re: [asa] Expelled and ID (ID detection?)
> > >
> > > #2a is where, IMHO, ID shoots itself in the foot by denying that the
> > > designer must be God. One could make a theological argument that if the
> > > creation reflects God's character, and if humans are made in the image of
> > > God, then we *do* have at least some information about what God as
> > > designer would or would not do. This is the analogia entis, the analogy of
> > > being, which is a kind of natural theology (but not the strong kind of
> > > argument from design advanced by Paley). Bonaventure offered a medieval
> > > understanding of the analogia entis as follows:
> > >
> > >
> > > "All created things of the sensible world lead the mind of the
> > > contemplator and wise man to eternal God... They are the shades, the
> > > resonances, the pictures of that efficient, exemplifying, and ordering art;
> > > they are the tracks, simulacra, and spectacles; they are divinely given
> > > signs set before us for the purpose of seeing God. They are exemplifications
> > > set before our still unrefined and sense-oriented minds, so that by the
> > > sensible things which they see they might be transferred to the intelligible
> > > which they cannot see, as if by signs to the signified" (*Itinerarium
> > > mentis ad Deum*, 2.11, as quoted p. *165*<http://www.amazon.com/Power-Images-Studies-History-Response/dp/0226261468/sr=8-1/qid=1166403688/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-3098627-7623259?ie=UTF8&s=books>
> > > ).
> > >
> > >
> > > Good discussion of the analogia entis, the
> > > protestant-Lutheran-Barthian response to it, and a balanced perspective,
> > > here: http://millinerd.com/2006/12/whos-afraid-of-analogia-entis.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 11:45 AM, David Campbell <
> > > pleuronaia@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Design could be detected scientifically if:
> > > > 1) it is clearly defined as to what is or is not designed
> > > >
> > > > and
> > > >
> > > > 2a) either we have information about what a designer would or would
> > > > not do
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > 2b) we have a large sample of known examples of designed and
> > > > non-designed objects from which we can characterize patterns.
> > > >
> > > > Both multiverse and pro-ID fine-tuning arguments run afoul of
> > > > criterion 2. We need to know either who the designer is and what
> > > > actions he/she/it/they would take (both ID and atheism advocates
> > > > profess ignorance about who yet certainty about what actions are
> > > > expected, an implausible position) or else need something like the
> > > > answer to the old spoof exam question "Describe the universe and
> > > > give
> > > > three examples", except that only three examples won't give you
> > > > enough
> > > > statistical confidence.
> > > >
> > > > In the case of human activity, we have fairly good ideas about both
> > > > 2a
> > > > and 2b. If "design" is defined as intentional human action, we can
> > > > compare things made by non-human natural agents with things made by
> > > > people and thus have a good idea as to whether, e.g., a crudely
> > > > flaked
> > > > flint pebble was deliberately shaped by an early hominid or trampled
> > > > by a herd of antelope.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Dr. David Campbell
> > > > 425 Scientific Collections
> > > > University of Alabama
> > > > "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > David W. Opderbeck
> > > Associate Professor of Law
> > > Seton Hall University Law School
> > > Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > David W. Opderbeck
> > Associate Professor of Law
> > Seton Hall University Law School
> > Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> David W. Opderbeck
> Associate Professor of Law
> Seton Hall University Law School
> Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
>
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 21 19:52:02 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Apr 21 2008 - 19:52:02 EDT