only now we have Paul Davies suggesting that the universe is predisposed to the evolution of 'mind' - and Game Theory suggesting that co-operation and community are the strongest survival strategies. Isn't that a further development from Hume and Darwin?
Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'insights'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 12:11 AM Subject: RE: Tom Bandy Reflection Part One - Palliative Care > >Some interesting reflections, Darren. I couldn't help thinking, however, that > >if we were to be really honest with ourselves about 'palliative care of > >congregations', we would have to admit that in reality we really are only > >applying palliative care to the whole church as it is functioning to day. This > >is largely because the God we have been proclaiming through our doctrines and > >creeds is himself currently receiving palliative care. The credibility of this > >God is and has been under attack since we started to move into a scientific > >understanding of the universe and until we start to perceive God in a way that > >makes sense of the world we live in, I can't see much hope of a resuscitation. > > Oh no! Don't say God is about to die again! But please, can we have a > resurrection rather than a resuscitation? > > OK, people have grown weary of some anthropomorphic projection of middle-eastern > culture into the sky, but where is this new God of Alan's going to come from? To > quote Peter Harrison: > > "In the second half of the eighteenth century, David Hume put forward a > persuasive case for the distinction between values and facts, insisting that we > cannot derive the former from the latter. The notion that nature retained > something of its moral authority was put to rest, though perhaps not finally, by > Hume's recognition that factual claims about states of affairs cannot provide us > with the basis for making moral judgements. Hume added insult to injury by > dealing a telling blow to the argument from design: not only is nature a moral > vacuum, but no theological conclusions of any consequence may be drawn from its > features. To these philosophical claims, Darwin was to add scientific substance > one hundred years later. The wonderful mechanisms of living creatures do not > bear testimony to a divine designer, but rather embody the end-results of > millions of years of fortuitous accidents." > > - Peter Harrison.The Bible, Protestantism and the rise of Natural > Science.1998. Cambridge University Press. > > > - Greg > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) > See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm > ------------------------------------------------------ > ------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
