Re: [asa] intervention

From: David Clounch <david.clounch@gmail.com>
Date: Fri Mar 06 2009 - 21:24:43 EST

>I am more comfortable just saying that God is there in the midst of
everything - both the mystery and the well-understood. We can probe the
mysteries without fear of pushing God aside. If those mysteries yield
ultimately to "natural" explanation fine, if they never do then that is fine
as well.

I don't understand why it makes a difference which it is. I mean, are not
both then an invocation of the supernatural?

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 6:09 PM, Keith Miller <kbmill@ksu.edu> wrote:

> Merv wrote:
>
> Just to push you a bit on this, Keith: So was Jesus' little
>> constitutional on the water just a continuation of the created natural
>> course of things? We all agree that literal occurrences of folks walking
>> on deep water is not common or typical, whatever else it may be. So didn't
>> God create gravity and water to cause the denser things to sink? While I
>> agree with your sentiments and response below, surely folks could be
>> forgiven for thinking of such events as "interventions", even if we don't
>> fully understand nature to be making judgments on what is 'out-of-bounds',
>> (if indeed anything is), and what isn't. (Your points below are well
>> taken.) But we do know enough, as they did then too, to recognize an
>> astonishing thing when we see it.
>>
>
> By all current understanding of the natural world there are some events
> described in scripture that are miraculous in the narrow sense of breaking
> the continuity of cause-and effect processes (violating "natural Law,"
> though I don't like that term). The greatest of these is of course the
> resurrection.
>
> My point is that there is no way to know in any absolute sense when an
> event is outside of what is creatively possible in the universe and what is
> not. Perhaps there is an aspect of God's creation that makes resurrection a
> possibility, but our understanding of the true nature of physical reality is
> so impoverished that we have no ability to conceive of creation in its
> fullest sense.
>
> All we are left with is our current limited understanding. But that
> doesn't prohibit us from seeking to bring our understanding of created
> physical reality closer to what that reality truly is. So we are left with
> what we can explain from out current limited knowledge and what we still
> cannot explain. To claim that any of the current outstanding questions are
> in principle unresolvable (true gaps in the created order) would seem to
> require a rather presumptuous assumption that we already know most of what
> there is to know about how the physical universe works.
>
> I am more comfortable just saying that God is there in the midst of
> everything - both the mystery and the well-understood. We can probe the
> mysteries without fear of pushing God aside. If those mysteries yield
> ultimately to "natural" explanation fine, if they never do then that is fine
> as well.
>
>
> Keith
>
> 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 Fri Mar 6 21:25:21 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Mar 06 2009 - 21:25:21 EST