Salu2
> Re: Classification scheme for ID debate
>
> Robert L. Miller (rlmiller@garlic.com)
> Wed, 8 Oct 1997 00:08:12 -0700
> Craig Rusbult wrote in part:
> >
> > Robert Miller says,
> >>I take "special intervention" to be raising Lazurus from the dead, but most
> >>of God's answers to prayer accomplished by the agency of His immanence.
> >
> > Yes, Lazarus was indeed special intervention. And obviously so.
> > But I don't see how "answers to prayer" can occur by mere "immanence"
> >-- instead, it seems that the actions of Joshua-and-Moses (in Exodus 20?),
> >with Joshua taking direct battle-action in the valley below, and Moses
> >praying to God on the hill above, are a good example of God's
> >mode-of-action in answering prayers. This seems more like "theistic
> >action" than a situation where God's action is limited to simply sustaining
> >the natural processes; during Joshua's battle the implication is that the
> >prayer -- and God's active "special response" to it -- made an important
> >difference in what happened.
> >
> >Craig R
> >
> I suspect God's working in this world is more on a continuim rather than in
> one mode or the other, with "special intervention" at one end and immanence?
> at the other. Raising Lazurus from the dead would fall at the special end;
> Moses praying for Joshua perhaps would lie toward the special end; keeping
> us healthy or providing us with food and shelter might lie toward the
> immanence end. God has encouraged us to ask for things of Him in prayer,
> both for ourselves and for others, and has indicated that He will respond.
> It may require a "special intervention" or it might call for jostling a few
> electrons to cause some subtle change that will appear to us as part of nature.
>
> Bob Miller