[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for that fascinating analysis, dear brother in Christ!

This line of argument was particularly interesting:

Now the skeptic believes history is something that floats on an infinitely extended and bottomless ocean of Chance. Therefore he can say that anything might happen. The Christian God revealing himself through prophets and apostles has as good of chance as Unicorns on Jupiter. The free-will Christian is in essential agreement with the skeptic in relation to history since the “possibilities” of history are above God. So these “possibilities” that are above God is the same thing as Chance. A God surrounded by Chance cannot speak with authority. He would be speaking into a vacuum. His voice could not be heard. And if God were surrounded by Chance, then human beings would be too. They would live in a vacuum, unable to hear either their own voices or those of others. Thus the whole of history, including all of its facts, would be without meaning.

It is curious how one can believe in chance (or randomness) on the one hand and omniscient God on the other hand.

Also, as a technical point, one cannot say something is random in the system when he does not know what the system "is." And science does not know and can never know the number and types of dimensions (spatial or temporal.)

So when one observes that anything in the physical creation is "random" he is making a statement of faith per se.

[the_conscience]

***Also, as a technical point, one cannot say something is random in the system when he does not know what the system “is.” And science does not know and can never know the number and types of dimensions (spatial or temporal.)***

Excellent point. I think Van Til called them both radical indeterminists and flaming determinists both at the same time. While they accept the “possibility” of anything they only believe what they know by their own experience.

[Quix]

Also, as a technical point, one cannot say something is random in the system when he does not know what the system “is.” And science does not know and can never know the number and types of dimensions (spatial or temporal.)

So when one observes that anything in the physical creation is “random” he is making a statement of faith per se.

= = =

Absolutely.

Have often said something similar over the decades. Sadly, the dogmatic faith in scientism is so entrenched, rigid, narrow . . . biased . . . the listeners often cannot even fathom the statement . . . just does not compute for them . . . goes in one ear, sails through clear air and out the other . . . and they just keep spouting the same religious-of-scientism dogma that is totally blown out of the water by the one fact you stated so simply, clearly and accurately.

Thx as ever.