RE: Does Creator Imply Designer? was Re: [asa] Stars May Not Be So Fine Tuned After All

From: Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu>
Date: Thu Jul 31 2008 - 10:02:59 EDT

God does not exist in spacetime so there is no way we can understand or fathom His actions except by analogies that are embedded in spacetime. Surely, the Creator of all, which is primarily the main description of the Biblical God, can be running the whole show that we experience in time and ascribe it to evolution without it being so. Let us not be haughty and claim to know it all. Let us leave room for the mystery that is an integral part of our existence.

 

Moorad

________________________________

From: Rich Blinne [mailto:rich.blinne@gmail.com]
Sent: Wed 7/30/2008 7:58 PM
To: Don Nield
Cc: Alexanian, Moorad; ASA
Subject: Does Creator Imply Designer? was Re: [asa] Stars May Not Be So Fine Tuned After All

Let me split the thread for you because it is an important question.
As to your and Moorad's point I -- along with most people here -- tend
to agree. But for me it is only up to a point. Creator does seem to
imply designer but I should be quick to point out it is not a
necessary one. We are all assuming here that human design is
analogical to Divine Creation and to the degree that God is
transcendent that analogy may break down at best. N.B. the history of
trinitarian analogies and how they get us into trouble. At worst it's
idolatry. The Second Commandment prohibition is predicated on God's
transcendence and our tendency to make Him in our image by
representing Him as analogous with the material Universe. Since we are
familiar with industrial design we assume -- maybe right, maybe wrong
-- that God's Creation is like manufacturing. The Universe as a
manufactured machine strikes me as waaaaay too simplified and thus I
tend to side more with the maybe wrong side of the equation.

Rich

On Jul 30, 2008, at 5:37 PM, Don Nield wrote:

> Rich's question is pertinent. My comment is not relevant to the
> title of the thread, but only to Moorad's last statement. My
> apologies for the thread splitting.
> Don
>
> Rich Blinne wrote:
>> I'm lost here. What does this have to do with whether the fine
>> tuning argument is valid or not?
>>
>> On Jul 30, 2008, at 5:25 PM, Don Nield wrote:
>>
>>> I disagree with Moorad on a number of things but on this one I
>>> agree with him. A Creator must be an Intelligent Designer. A
>>> designer (with a small d) need not be a Creator.
>>> I find it interesting that Ken Miller in his latest book argues
>>> that Behe's version of a designer is in effect a creator.
>>> Don
>>>
>>> Alexanian, Moorad wrote:
>>>> If I am not wrong, a designer need not be a Creator, but
>>>> certainly a Creator is a Designer and if you can create then you
>>>> must be intelligent. Therefore, a Creator must be an Intelligent
>>>> Designer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Moorad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jul 31 10:03:33 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jul 31 2008 - 10:03:33 EDT