Re: [asa] Doug Groothuis v. William Dembski

From: David Opderbeck <>
Date: Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:21:10 EST

Yes, the Barthian reply! But I like the little article I linked to below
that argues the analogia fidei and the analogia entis don't have to be
entirely incompatible:

David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology

On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 12:03 PM, George Murphy <> wrote:

> We also see apparently senseless suffering and destruction in nature. We
> observe the strong exploiting the weak in the natural world and in human
> history. How do we know *a priori* that such things aren't be the primary
> clue to the character of God?
> Answer: We don't. We begin to know the character of God from his
> historical revelation centered on Christ, & then we can start to relate what
> we observe in the world to God. That is *analogia fidei*, not *analogia
> entis*.
> Shalom
> George
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* David Opderbeck <>
> *To:* Iain Strachan <>
> *Cc:* ; Rich Blinne <> ;
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:23 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Doug Groothuis v. William Dembski
> Yes, but, I don't want to be hasty in dismissing the analogia entis
> altogether. First, I think we do have intuitive a priori knowledge of God
> -- a key question is the degree to which that natural knowledge is
> surpressed by sin (Romans 1). Second, it seems reasonable to assume that
> something created will bear some characteristics that are analogous to
> characteristics possessed by its creator -- e.g., beauty, rationality,
> order. If we see beauty, rationality and order in nature, and we have at
> least some dim sense that there must be a God, it seems reasonable to
> suggest that these characteristics point towards a creator-God who also
> possesses those characteristics. A weak form of the argument from design --
> "small i.d." if you will -- seems to me a reasonable argument to make.

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 1 12:21:21 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:21:21 EST