A little while ago I blogged about creation saying that I didn't see that God creating through a process that might show up as evolutionary was very different from the claim that 'God made me' even though quite clearly I was generated by my parents' genetic material in suitable biological conditions. It will be no surprise to find this view elsewhere:
"He said he called this approach the “fully-gifted Creation” perspective, meaning that God created the universe out of nothing, and provided it with all of the resources required to make its evolutionary development possible. If that sounds too formal or difficult to remember, just think of it as the Right Stuff Universe Principle,” said Van Till. “The universe has the ‘right stuff’ to make the natural evolution of atoms, stars, starfish and human stargazers possible.” [note this isn't Cornelius Van Til!] Anyway pretty compatible with what I wrote. But then we have to reckon with this:
"Conservative Christian critics were skeptical, said Van Till, and considered his approach deist"
And you can see why, it seems to say God put it all together at the beginning and is just letting things unfold. However, that is not necessarily what is being claimed for the view. The fatal flaw, it seems to me, in that objection is that it seems somehow to see God as inside time [which is problematic since time is surely a created 'elemental' St.Augustine among others made a convincing case for the createdness of time which Einstein kind of supports]. If God is outside, in some important ways, of our space-time continuum, then the flow of time from which we make this judgement is hardly the point. God creates all, including the developmental processes fromstart to finish. The fact that God chooses to include some reflexivity in the processes [which make complexity, emergence, and human free will possible within the flow] simply complicates things for us but means we are here to debate it. Anyway, all of space time sits within God's creative nurturance even the developments. This shows up in the form of Van Till's further riposte: "He also pointed out that God’s continuing action of sustaining is as essential as His action of creating in the first place."
What I'm saying is that there really isn't much if any difference between the creative act and the sustaining of creation, they both proceed from the same will and act of God.
Now if you want to make it really complicated try to work out how God can will something to happen when God is outside of time ...
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"
I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...
-
I've been watching the TV series 'Foundation'. I read the books about 50 years ago (I know!) but scarcely now remember anything...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
No comments:
Post a Comment