Re: Natural Evil

Jim,
As I see it, your question applies to YEC, where the question has to
arise, "Why did God take six days instead, as Augustine thought, of
creating instantaneously?" The best answer to your question from a sane
view of science that I have found is from George L. Murphy. His The
Cosmos in the Light of the Cross, 2003, has a blurb that reads, in part:
"George Murphy finds understanding in the theology of the cross, with a
God who becomes a participant in the universe and thereby shares the
suffering, loss, and death that are part of the worldly experience." He
applies it to ecology, evolution and bioethics. His chapter,
"Christology, Evolution, and the Cross," pp. 370ff in Keith B. Miller,
ed., Perspectives on an Evolving Creation, 2003 (which is less expensive)
also presents the argument. I won't try to summarize it here.
Dave

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:40:34 -0700 "Jim Armstrong" <jarmstro@qwest.net>
writes:
Just for sake of discussion - if God has that level of knowledge and
understanding and control, why do you think he did not just go directly
for the bottom line in Creation instead of putting a time-constrained
process-oriented creation in place? JimA

With the omniscient God there is no such thing as "dumb luck". No volcano
erupted in the Garden because God knew what he was doing. To Him natural
processes are predictable so that, for example, he could have the wind
blow at the right time and with the right velocity to roll back the
waters
of the Red Sea so that the Israelites could cross on dry ground. We are
confident that when we pray, if it is God's will, he can keep natural
disasters away from us without changing the laws of physics even though
such events happen at other times and places.

Gordon Brown
Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309-0395

  
Received on Fri Oct 1 00:20:18 2004