Comments on: A Random Response to Stephen Barr

By: Joe DeVet

Joe DeVet — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 03:41:54 +0000

Picture this: a Sanhedrin member tells another member, “You won’t believe the luck of that itinerant preacher from Galilee. Yesterday we thought we had him. Told him he was in arrears on his temple tax. He told his sidekick Simon, with a wink, to go fishing. And what do you suppose happened? Simon immediately caught a fish with a coin in his mouth that paid both their tax for the year. Is that a million-to-one shot or what? Where does that guy get his luck?”

By: MarjorieMorningstar

MarjorieMorningstar — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:19:58 +0000

“This may not apply to Francis Collins, and if not then I am sorry that I followed John West in misrepresenting the views of a man I greatly admire.”

In defense of Dr. West, the context in which Collins uses the word “could:”

Francis Collins, _The Language of God_ [Free Press, 2006] p205:

But how could God take such chances? If evolution is random, how could He really be in charge, and how could He be certain of an outcome that included intelligent beings at all?

The solution is actually readily at hand, once one ceases to apply human limitations to God. If God is outside of nature, then He is outside of space and time. In that context, God could in the moment of creation of the universe also know every detail of the future. That could include the formation of the stars, planets, and galaxies, all of the chemistry, physics, geology, and biology that led to the formation of life on earth, and the evolution of humans, right in the moment of your reading this book – and beyond. In that context, evolution could appear to us to be driven by chance, but from God’s perspective the outcome would be entirely specified. Thus, God could be completely and intimately involved in the creation of all species, while from our perspective, limited as it is by the tyranny of finite time, this would appear a random and undirected process.

[Any typographical errors are mine.]

I greatly admire Dr. Collins too. I also admire Dr. West. Collins’ use of the word “could” is not pertinent to West’s argument, which is that “Francis Collins suggests that God “could” have known the specific outcomes of evolution beforehand even though He made evolution appear “a random and undirected process.” In other words, God is a cosmic trickster who misleads people into thinking that nature is blind and purposeless, even though it isn’t.”

West’s argument seems to me quite fair and worthy of an answer….

By: Chris B

Chris B — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 18:18:09 +0000

Maybe I’m too simple-minded to grasp the complexity of the issue, but doesn’t the concept of providence resolve the issue of contingency/design in biology quite neatly? After all, with regard to history, Christians believe that the Roman Empire was ordained by God to provide the setting for the Incarnation (among other reasons perhaps) – while still being the work of Octavian Caesar and other Roman politicians. In the same way, I suppose that life may have emerged by contingent processes while still expressing divine intention. God can make the dice fall as He likes.

Or am I missing something important?

By: The Anchoress — A First Things Blog

The Anchoress — A First Things Blog — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 17:40:54 +0000

[...] Joe Carter and Stephen Barr are having a very interesting debate on Theistic evolutionists – what is random, what is directed by God. Not for skimming, for reading! Film review: Archbishop Chaput gives “The Stoning of Soraya M.” two thumbs up. Sounds like it’s worth seeing. [...]