i. Since the Enlightenment scientific development has led to a world view that can be
described in a mechanical way. In a modernistic world, processes in creation were
described in a deterministic way, while causality moved Godâs involvement in
creation to deism. The uncovering of the quantum world and the insight that
creation also displays a contingent character in different areas, brought about a
new cosmology and made the question about divine action more relevant. The
problem was that science could not understand and declare happenings in creation,
solely from a physical point of view. In the post-modern world, reformed
theology professes God as acting in both a transcendental and immanent way. A
new cosmology required a reformulation of the traditional doctrine of Providence
and testimony concerning divine agency. Polkinghorne, as a prominent
scientist/theologian suggests that a Trinitarian God is acting in the cosmos and that
both science and religion co-operate in a complementary way to display Godâs
divine action. This proposal could be promising for reformed theology.
ii. The core question in this study is: can Polkinghorneâs understanding of how God
acts in the world, contribute to the broadening of a traditional doctrine of
Providence? To answer this question, there must be a clear understanding
concerning the relationship between science and religion.
iii. The question of how God acts and Polkinghorneâs eventual contribution is derived
from these different models. The present debate necessitates a new relationship
between science and religion, as traditional approaches failed to appreciate the
unity in creation.
iv. Polkinghorneâs proposal on how God acts, links with other more recent models,
which focus on an inter-disciplinary approach. This approach benefits from the
insight obtained from both the physical and human sciences.
v. This broad review leads to Polkinghorneâs cosmological proposal. His
epistemology is based on critical realism that utilizes the concept of dual- aspect
monism in order to defend an anti-reductionistic perspective on reality. This
metaphysical outlook enables him to revaluate the physical reality from a
Trinitarian confession of eschatological hope.
vi. Polkinghorne suggests a complementary relationship between science and religion,
where both disciplines can function harmoniously. Theology as equal partner of
science answers the meta questions that transcend scientific observation.
vii. Polkinghorne professes a Trinitarian God that is personally involved in his
creation, in such a way, that His temporal and kenotic nature comes to the fore.
This transcendental/immanent act of Godâs self-revelation, culminates in the
incarnation of Jesus Christ as the Resurrected.
viii. Acts of God are recognizable in a Natural Theology that respects the relationship
with science. God acts holistically within an open cosmos that has been
intelligently designed and is anthropically balanced. The conveyance of divine
knowledge takes place within complex systems, like the chaos theory, which is an
interaction between chance and necessity. This is recognizable to man that
developed self-consciousness through a process of evolution and implies a process
of continuous unfolding, from and towards complexity. Man is working in cooperation
with God, who sometimes works under exceptional circumstances in
extraordinary ways, of which the resurrection of Christ is a testimony.
ix. A reformed understanding of Providence is traditionally divided into three
different areas of divine action, namely upholding, governance and co-operation.
The Trinitarian God maintains and governs the whole cosmos which culminates in
the incarnation and resurrection of Christ. That is the strength of this approach.
The primary focus is soteriological. The shortcoming on the other hand, is a
limited cosmological focus and an under- estimation of scientific insights. These
are two elements that necessitate this study.
x. The methodological interaction of scientific hypotheses in Polkinghorneâs
proposal is definitely strange to a traditional, reformed perspective. The central
focus and starting point of his approach, namely a Trinitarian relationship that
expresses itself in the resurrection of Jesus, agrees however with a traditional
view. He offers a definite contribution towards the reformed doctrine. His
contribution can be summarized as follows:
xi. Firstly, a complementary relationship between science and religion affirms that
divine action is acknowledged holistically as continuous cosmological events.
xii. Secondly, through a new Natural theology, science, as conversation partner of
theology, reveals Godâs excellence in His continuing self-announcement in
creation.
xiii. Thirdly, dipolarity, as potential reformed theological construction, shows promise
to base divine action on Godâs faithfulness.
xiv. Fourthly, God acts in a Trinitarian way through the interaction of chance and
necessity in creation. A reformed understanding is challenged to harmonize a
contingent reality with the confession of a faithful God taking care of his creation
every moment.
xv. Fifthly, panentheism does have a limited value within the reformed theology. It
challenges a reformed approach to further reflect upon Godâs immanent presence
in the world.
xvi. In conclusion: in the light of the quantum era the standpoint on Providence in the
Articles of Faith needs to be reformulated.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:ufs/oai:etd.uovs.ac.za:etd-10042011-120729 |
| Date | 04 October 2011 |
| Creators | Pieterse, André |
| Contributors | Prof R Venter |
| Publisher | University of the Free State |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en-uk |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | http://etd.uovs.ac.za//theses/available/etd-10042011-120729/restricted/ |
| Rights | unrestricted, I hereby certify that, if appropriate, I have obtained and attached hereto a written permission statement from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis, dissertation, or project report, allowing distribution as specified below. I certify that the version I submitted is the same as that approved by my advisory committee. I hereby grant to University Free State or its agents the non-exclusive license to archive and make accessible, under the conditions specified below, my thesis, dissertation, or project report in whole or in part in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. I retain all other ownership rights to the copyright of the thesis, dissertation or project report. I also retain the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis, dissertation, or project report. |
Page generated in 0.0153 seconds