RE: [asa] Detecting Design - Mind and Hands

From: Alexanian, Moorad <alexanian@uncw.edu>
Date: Wed Dec 17 2008 - 17:34:01 EST

Hi Mike,
 

Thanks for the reference to Babbage, quite an impressive thinker and doer. I am not sure what laws Babbage is referring to. Are these the laws of Nature that we have arrived at of the world out there that does not include the humans who have studied the workings of Nature? These laws do not deal with the nature of man or with questions of existence and may easily lead to a form of physicalism. Of course, the models of the laws that we create of Nature may not be the laws that "God himself has impressed on his creation." It seems kind of obvious that we are "little creators" whereas God is the "Big Creator" since our existence is not part, nor can be ever a part, of whatever theory we develop of Nature. Actually, it is a form of glorifying the Creator that we recognize our "own unfitness for the mighty task."

Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Nucacids
Sent: Wed 12/17/2008 4:10 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Detecting Design - Mind and Hands

Hi Moorad,

"How are we to understand, "upholds all things by the word of His power?"
Heb. 1:3."

I would understand it to say that all of Creation is contingent and depends
on God's mercy for its existence.

"I suppose to uphold the creation must be very similar to originally
bringing the creation into being. There is no comparison of this act of God
to anything that is part of the creation itself, least of all, how we design
and "create" things."

Indeed. In fact, earlier on, I posted something by Babbage to this group:

"Many excellent and religious persons not deeply versed in what they
mistakenly call "human knowledge" but which is in truth the interpretation
of those laws that God himself has impressed on his creation, have
endeavoured to discover proofs of design in a multitude of apparent
adaptations of means to ends, and have represented the Deity as perpetually
interfering, to alter for a time the laws he had previously ordained; thus
by implication denying to him the possession of that foresight which is the
highest attribute of omnipotence. Minds of this order, insensible of the
existence of that combining and generalising faculty which gives to human
intellect its greatest development, and tied down by the trammels of their
peculiar pursuits, have in their mistaken zeal not perceived their own
unfitness for the mighty task, and have ventured to represent the Creator of
the universe as fettered by the same infirmities as those by which their own
limited faculties are subjugated."

http://www.victorianweb.org/science/science_texts/bridgewater/b1.htm

I don't think we humans are capable of comprehending how God acts with his
creation. My dog would have a better chance comprehending how you and I are
communicating. This is one reason why I have long argued it is important to
distinguish ID from religion and theology.

- Mike

> How are we to understand, "upholds all things by the word of His power?"
> Heb. 1:3. I suppose to uphold the creation must be very similar to
> originally bringing the creation into being. There is no comparison of
> this act of God to anything that is part of the creation itself, least of
> all, how we design and "create" things.
>
> Moorad
>
> ________________________________
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Dec 17 17:34:12 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 17 2008 - 17:34:12 EST