Among some benchmark works valuable in assessing the new science of Intelligent Design is David Bartholomew's God Chance and Purpose. Mr Bartholomew was Emeritus Professor of Statistics at the London School of Economics and Political Science along with a long and impressive list of accomplishments. He is also a Methodist preacher. In his latest book, Mr Bartholomew convincingly lays out the argument for chance being part of God's creation. From the laws of statistics used everyday in science and industry, he demonstrates that any model for Intelligent Design has to grapple with the "reality" of randomness or chance found in nature. Addressing Dr. William Dembski's contributions to Intelligent Design, namely the theorem of Specified Complexity (see my article) David finds some concerns in what he describes as circularity in Dembski's method. Dr Dembski answers those concerns here. I agree with Dembski that any theology that is in discord of the plain teaching of scripture is suspect. Dembski's accuses Bartholomew of being an advocate of what is known as Open Theology which is more liberal than traditional Arminianism. Although I'm not interested in getting in any arguments about Predestination and Arminianism, I agree with the predestination camp that believes God knows everything, even the future. If God isn't aware of the future, then it would negate all prophecy. At the same time however, I believe chance and randomness are also "true" in our sense and experiences. It's demonstrable characteristics show us that it is real. But if the arrow of time, the nature of time to be one-way or irreversible in our experience, shows us that the past is fixed, then why not the future also? Why would the future be any different than the past? Chance would then be merely an illusion, a veil that only prophets are given a peek through occasionally. We know, through real prophecy found in the scriptures, that information can flow from the future to the past and then to us in the present. One of the interesting studies I am pursuing is the ancient practice of casting lots. It is mentioned not only in the Old and New Testaments but also in extant writings of the surrounding cultures. More on all this in the next post.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Chance and Reason
Among some benchmark works valuable in assessing the new science of Intelligent Design is David Bartholomew's God Chance and Purpose. Mr Bartholomew was Emeritus Professor of Statistics at the London School of Economics and Political Science along with a long and impressive list of accomplishments. He is also a Methodist preacher. In his latest book, Mr Bartholomew convincingly lays out the argument for chance being part of God's creation. From the laws of statistics used everyday in science and industry, he demonstrates that any model for Intelligent Design has to grapple with the "reality" of randomness or chance found in nature. Addressing Dr. William Dembski's contributions to Intelligent Design, namely the theorem of Specified Complexity (see my article) David finds some concerns in what he describes as circularity in Dembski's method. Dr Dembski answers those concerns here. I agree with Dembski that any theology that is in discord of the plain teaching of scripture is suspect. Dembski's accuses Bartholomew of being an advocate of what is known as Open Theology which is more liberal than traditional Arminianism. Although I'm not interested in getting in any arguments about Predestination and Arminianism, I agree with the predestination camp that believes God knows everything, even the future. If God isn't aware of the future, then it would negate all prophecy. At the same time however, I believe chance and randomness are also "true" in our sense and experiences. It's demonstrable characteristics show us that it is real. But if the arrow of time, the nature of time to be one-way or irreversible in our experience, shows us that the past is fixed, then why not the future also? Why would the future be any different than the past? Chance would then be merely an illusion, a veil that only prophets are given a peek through occasionally. We know, through real prophecy found in the scriptures, that information can flow from the future to the past and then to us in the present. One of the interesting studies I am pursuing is the ancient practice of casting lots. It is mentioned not only in the Old and New Testaments but also in extant writings of the surrounding cultures. More on all this in the next post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment