Re: [asa] Doug Groothuis v. William Dembski

We also see apparently senseless suffering and destruction in nature. We observe the strong exploiting the weak in the natural world and in human history. How do we know a priori that such things aren't be the primary clue to the character of God?

Answer: We don't. We begin to know the character of God from his historical revelation centered on Christ, & then we can start to relate what we observe in the world to God. That is analogia fidei, not analogia entis.

Shalom
George

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: David Opderbeck
  To: Iain Strachan
  Cc: john_walley@yahoo.com ; Rich Blinne ; asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Thursday, January 01, 2009 11:23 AM
  Subject: Re: [asa] Doug Groothuis v. William Dembski

  Yes, but, I don't want to be hasty in dismissing the analogia entis altogether. First, I think we do have intuitive a priori knowledge of God -- a key question is the degree to which that natural knowledge is surpressed by sin (Romans 1). Second, it seems reasonable to assume that something created will bear some characteristics that are analogous to characteristics possessed by its creator -- e.g., beauty, rationality, order. If we see beauty, rationality and order in nature, and we have at least some dim sense that there must be a God, it seems reasonable to suggest that these characteristics point towards a creator-God who also possesses those characteristics. A weak form of the argument from design -- "small i.d." if you will -- seems to me a reasonable argument to make.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 1 12:04:21 2009