> In contrast with some suggestions (by Terry, Allan, George,...), I think
>there may be a place for MIRM in a theistic worldview, if God sometimes
>(for some phenomena in some situations) *allows* things to run in a
>hands-off deistic way. For example, a falling leaf, or the motion of
>hydrogen in a star in a distant galaxy. I won't say that some motion *is*
>MIRM, but I think it *could be* MIRM with a well-designed universe. This
>is different than a "functional integrity" that makes claims (way beyond
>its theological or scientific bases of support, I think) that there *was
>not* or *could not be* any "theistic action" in nature.
I, for one, don't believe that this is the way God works. His involvement
in a falling leaf or in the motion of hydrogen in a star in a distant
galaxy is just as intimate as his turning water into wine at the wedding of
Cana.
Why do we see God as a human designer who makes things that work to
accomplish a specific purpose? Human designers don't sustain nor do they
concur nor do they govern any way near the way God does. As far as human
designers are concerned matter is essentially self-sustaining. The
existence of the designed object and its properties (once designed) does
not depend any longer on the designer. Not so with God's design, creation,
etc. Light would not have the properties it has if God did not continually
will that it be so. This is part of what is meant by concurrence.
TG
_________________
Terry M. Gray, Computer Support Scientist
Chemistry Department, Colorado State University
Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
grayt@lamar.colostate.edu http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/
phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801