Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: The Raven
Invoking God to explain what we can't otherwise account for, he says, is "a kind of idolatry," because true faith should come from within and not because we can't fully explain the natural world.

It's long been my view, that beyond this, many versions of creationism -- including both classic "creation science" and "intelligent design" -- are deistic rather than theistic. They focus repeatedly on arguing that God (or "intelligence") must be invoked here or there, to account for some occurrence or phenomena. But the corollary to a God who is occasionally present is a God who is occasionally absent.

I prefer what might be referred to as a doctrine of "continuous creation". The creation isn't just an event that occurred back then, "in the beginning," but occurs in each and ever moment as God's investment of being upholds the world in continued existence. In fact I wonder if the relationship between God and the creation isn't even more intimate than a willful investment of the former's being into the existence of the latter. It could be that that the material world is an aspect or manifestation of God's being. IOW the world is "part of" God rather than something apart from Him.

461 posted on 02/17/2004 3:11:51 PM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Stultis
It could be that that the material world is an aspect or manifestation of God's being. IOW the world is "part of" God rather than something apart from Him.

I would like to believe that God feels our pain literally and continuously, rather than in occasional photo-ops, like Bill Clinton. More than a few thinkers have suggested that God is in us.

467 posted on 02/17/2004 5:57:04 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson