Just a few thoughts I did not state before, by
way of amplifying and clarifying.
First, I myself hold to what I think is correctly
called a high Augustinian/Calvinist view of God's
relation to the world, according to which the world
as we know it here and now is what Calvin called
somewhere a "perpetual miracle," that is, a constant
source of wonder and awe. I don't quite hold the
occasionalist view that God is the efficient cause
of all things, but I would affirm that "the will of
God is the cause of things," as Aquinas once said.
Here Dick Bube's essay on the God of the gaps and his
thought experiment about God "turning himself/herself
off" for a period of time are both very illuminating:
if the world really does depend moment by moment on
God's grace for its very existence (as I believe with
Bube), then it is a bit problematic to speak of gaps
in the natural order filled with divine activity, for
God is seen as active all the time. I wrote about
Newton's view (identical to mine) in an essay called
"Newton's Rejection of the Newtonian World View," several
years ago. I follow Newton in emphasizing the etymological
point that "miracles" are "wonders," from the Latin root
of the English word.
On the other hand, I also affirm (contrary to some others
who hold a high Augustinian view) that it IS appropriate
to speak of "gaps" in naturalistic causation for certain
events. In other words, though God is active always and
everywhere, the MODE of divine activity is not always
one that we can understand in terms of regular, "natural"
causes. For example, if we really believe in an empty
tomb and a "risen" lord, as I do, then in my opinion we must
accept the ultimately inexplicable nature of the event from
within naturalism. We might talk cleverly about "higher
laws" that God might be employing, but it really comes down
to a deep mystery that genuine naturalists aren't going to
believe happened.
A number of modern authors, following physicist William
Pollard and others -- Bob Russell is in this category -- believe
that God's "free" activity (by which they mean, "unpredictable"
activity) can be located in quantum events, which have macroscopic
consequences. This may prove to be a very fruitful way of
getting around Descartes' old problem of the pineal gland
(how spirit affects matter), though I suspect most of those
authors would not like the Cartesian dualism I just invoked.
In my opinion, this is a very sophisticated form of the God
of the gaps, because it still insists that God acts specially
in gaps in our knowledge. The fact that those gaps cannot
be filled IN PRINCIPLE, because of quantum uncertainty, is
convenient.
I mean the paragraph above as an analysis, not as an
unfriendly criticism, for I myself think that God does act
in gaps, as well as normally. But I would affirm again that
the "gaps" are from our point of view, not God's.