Re: [asa] Rejoinder 4D from Timaeus ­ to Ted Davis: Martian Sculptures and Owen Gingerich

I'm not sure if Timaeus has answered the queries about randomness that I posed to him a while ago (Christine also tried to wrest an answer from him on those points).

Did I miss it? If not, Timaeus, are you willing to answer? I think those questions really do get to the heart of the issue.

I apologize if I missed the replies - if so, let me know and I'll dig through the threads again.

Thanks,

dennis

On 10/6/08 7:56 PM, "gmurphy10@neo.rr.com" <gmurphy10@neo.rr.com> wrote:

---- David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:
> Timaeus said: Yet, if we accept Gingerich's account here as a tentative
> explanation, clearly God is being mixed up with natural causes.
>
> I respond: This is getting tiresome because you're still not willing to
> consider that "causes" can be both "natural" and "of God." You've admitted,
> I think, that the "cause" of the birth of a baby is both "natural" and
> "God's will." Why can't there be multiple levels of causation elsewhere in
> nature?

Bingo! I have already noted this, & hope that I will be exonerated from any charge of hubris in saying that by the fact that this idea of God's action bthrough natural processes is an old & widespread part of Christian belief. It long predates either David or myself. & failure to recognize this is just one reason why I consider Timaeus' summas much ado about not very much.

Shalom,
George

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Oct 6 23:03:10 2008