- The Ransom Theory revisited #2 24/01/2018
- The Ransom Theory revisited #1 22/01/2018
- Patristic (and later) use of Rom. 1:20 as natural theology 19/01/2018
- More on Natural Theology: A New Exchange with George Murphy 18/01/2018
- Natural Theology, ID, and Lutherans: A Response to Davis, Murphy and Swamidass 17/01/2018
Monthly Archives: December 2012
On an Uncommon Descent thread, I was taken to task for not expanding on an answer I gave about whether there are things that are not designed. On the basis that God is the Creator of all things I had said the answer was “No.” The immediate challenge to me was whether I included my own sins in that, and I think that was intended to demolish my position. In fact, as I shall go on to show, it simply raises a whole new topic in theology which has been tackled by varying approaches from earliest times.
My purpose is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Colossians 2.2-3
I’ve had an interesting exchange on a BioLogos thread about C S Lewis with its author, David Williams, and some others. The most striking comment would take us way off-topic if I raised it there, and that was Beaglelady’s one-liner (which she’s used before, actually) concerning the argument about how much evolution actualises God’s purposes, for example in producing mankind as we are rather than as a mollusc: Clearly, God wanted a white male fundagelicall! It’s very tempting to analyse this sentence critically and point out that the the first four words are regrettably irreverent, the fifth racist, the sixth sexist, the first half of the seventh what Jim Packer … Continue reading
This has been the big weekend of the year for our family – my daughter’s wedding. We parents had no part in the planning. Although it was held at the Anglican church in our village, daughter and fiancé organised everything, and we were just delegated organisational roles and speeches. And bills, of course.
One of the clichés trotted out to dispute the sovereignty of God described in Scripture is that the Hebrew writers’ view of God was conditioned by the example of the ANE king, wielding absolute power in an arbitrary way, beyond all questioning and, of course, having scant regard to the liberty of his subjects, which is the main priority nowadays for those who are not too happy to be subjects. In the science-faith game, this view of things applies particularly to God as Creator, forming the Universe by his word of command – whereas we all know (somehow) that actually freedom is God’s greatest priority.
I can’t let the passing of Patrick Moore, amateur astronomer extraordinaire, go unremarked. He died today at the age of 89, the presenter until just this year of The Sky at Night, which has been running under his banner since 1957 – a world record for a TV show. He was the only person to have met Orville Wright, Yuri Gagarin and Neil Armstrong. He used to appear regularly on kids TV when I was small, and so was the man who got me interested in astronomy. In fact I got his book for my birthday round about 1958 (the jacket on mine is long-gone, though I still have the … Continue reading
I don’t normally write about sociological issues like this here, but followers of British poliutics may know that the Prime Minister is pushing forward a law to allow homosexuals to marry (rather than entering the current “civil partnerships”) in religious institutions. No church, he reassures us, will be forced to participate. The media report that the Catholic, Anglican, Orthodox and Evangelical (umbrella group) churches are firmly opposed to this, as are the Muslims and the majority of Jews. But, they say, “some churches are in favour”, such as the Unitarians and the Quakers. Or rather, just these two are in favour. The BBC evening news carried an interview with a … Continue reading
I’ve now got hold of David L Wilcox’s little book God and Evolution, and think I can add him to the disappointingly small group of TEs who actually do combine biblical faith with a realistic approach to science. The book isn’t world-shatteringly original – well within the genre of “a scientist shows that faith and science are compatible”, but I think it would be just the kind of thing for penman to give to his Reformed Creationist friends as a palatable apologetic.
Almost as briefly, but rather more seriously, I recently rediscovered a quote from archaeologist Alan Millard which may be food for thought when critics speak of the lack of evidence for biblical characters like Abraham, Moses, or even King David. Millard says: “Of about 120 kings known from a dozen Iron Age states of the Levant, including Israel and Judah, at the most only 20 have left inscriptions that are known today.” History would read pretty differently if it took the minimalist view overall.
I must be taking my work too seriously. My wife’s left a note on my desk to remind me to get firewood in. I was convinced it said “Logos”.