From: Preston Garrison (garrisonp@uthscsa.edu)
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 05:20:19 EDT
I want to put a question to the group in relation to the argument
about whether natural theology has any value as an apologetic device.
Awhile back a friend sent me something he was writing for me to
critique. It was an extended loose argument for a divine intelligence
based on detailed consideration of biological marvels like cells and
vision and the brain. He did not use specific probability arguments
like Dembski, but the goal seemed much the same -this stuff is way
too intelligent looking to have come into existence by chance.
I struggled with the critiqueing because I found that I that I didn't
have much enthusiasm for his project. When I reflected on why I felt
that, it seemed to me that, while I have some expectation that a
person might come to believe in God from their personal experience of
or study of nature, I have little or no expectation that anyone who
doesn't already believe in God would have their mind changed by an
_argument_ from nature. I think I have known at least one person who
came to faith in Christ by a path that began with scientific study
leading to belief in a god. But I don't think I've ever heard of
anyone having their mind changed by someone else's _argument_ from
nature.
Anyone know of any example? - best of all, yourself?
Preston G.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 05:21:11 EDT