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

To: betty boop
I have no dispute whatsoever that Nature constantly "reconfigures" herself.

Nor do I. For me, discussions about speciation (and even possible theories about the generation of life) are discussions about the nuts-and-bolts "how" of creation. For me this stuff is enormously fascinating, but I seldom do more than lurk and read along. I readily admit the science guys (and the philosophers) are a lot smarter than me on the subject.

Some people look at an apparently automatic process and see a self-directed system; others marvel at the formula and the princple that undergirds it, and the marvelous intelligence behind it all. The more they discover about the nuts and bolts of creation, the more I marvel.

The "who" of creation is a settled issue for me. Once you know God that issue rather evaporates. The "why" of it I look forward to seeing unfold as eternity itself unfolds.

159 posted on 12/10/2012 6:10:03 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]


To: marron; Alamo-Girl; allmendream; tacticalogic; xzins; metmom; spirited irish; TXnMA; YHAOS; ...
Some people look at an apparently automatic process and see a self-directed system; others marvel at the formula and the principle that undergirds it, and the marvelous intelligence behind it all. The more they discover about the nuts and bolts of creation, the more I marvel.

I marvel too, dear brother in Christ!

I marvel "at the formula and the principle that undergirds it, and the marvelous intelligence behind it all" — which alone accounts for why Nature "constantly 'reconfigures' herself" in lawful ways.

Which answers one of Leibniz's two great questions, "Why are things the way they are, not some other way?"

His other great question was: "Why is there anything at all, why not nothing?" The answer to this question is arguably entirely beyond the competence of science. That is, a methodology based on direct observation has no means to address this question in principle. For no one has ever seen "nothing," better put "no-thing." This concept indicates more than simple "absence" or "empty space"....

So, I'm glad for the work of the "nuts and bolts" guys of science. It seems they mainly engage in "the instrumentalization of Nature," and their work has produced amazing benefits for mankind — but also some amazing risks.

If Nature were "lawless," or random in her deportment, she would be immune from such "instrumentalization" by scientists. This seems to be the point that orthodox evolutionists are always trying to forget.

In conclusion, I entirely agree with your statement:

The "who" of creation is a settled issue for me. Once you know God that issue rather evaporates. The "why" of it I look forward to seeing unfold as eternity itself unfolds.

Amen!!!

Thank you so very much for your penetrating insights — May God ever bless you, dear brother in Christ!

161 posted on 12/11/2012 12:16:54 PM PST by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | 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