Reasons for Randomness: A Solution to the Axiological Problem for Theists

A Randomness‐based Theodicy for Evolutionary Evils

“…Perhaps God could be said to experience curiosity, anticipation, surprise, and appreciation over a creation in which random processes are present. Elsewhere, we develop and defend this controversial proposal in greater detail, and we show how it can fit with many of the major theories of divine providence (see Wessling and Rasmussen , 288–304). Here, we note just that it is perhaps easiest to see how this theory of God's experiences could fit with simple foreknowledge and open theist views.…”

“…What might the value of such an autonomous cosmos be? Several answers to this question have been suggested (see, e.g., Wessling and Rasmussen , 293–95; Peacocke , 104–11; Polkinghorne , 69–79; Haught , 78–83, 168–70; Johnson , 154–80; Collins ), but one significantly influential proposal is that a universe that unfolds by way of a delicate synergy between law and chance heightens the beauty of creation. Favored metaphors for God's involvement with a largely autonomous cosmos include the following: a grand composer who “beginning with an arrangement of notes in an apparently simple tune, elaborates and expands it into a fugue” (Peacocke , 72); a “theatrical improviser of unsurpassed ingenuity in live performance, who amplifies and embroiders each theme as it presents itself” (Johnson , 177); or a choreographer who dances, and even plays, with creation in a manner that does not interfere with the universe's given rhythm (Peacocke , 108–11; cf.…”

“…It is in keeping with theism, after all, that God may interact with creation without precluding a generally autonomous creation. For instance, one might hold that there is something valuable about God working with a semiautonomous creation, which includes intermittent divine tune‐ups or transformations (see Wessling and Rasmussen , 298). Another option is that advancements relevant to personal and societal growth could move along “natural” lines even while entropy increases throughout the universe.…”

Response to Dumsday's “Palamism and Dispositionalism”

“…Even randomness like quantum fluctuation can be recognized to be uncoerced action that is God's gifting to creation, and therefore should count as free will, even if only in a primitive sense. Randomness can enjoy the same value as the canonical sense of free will (i.e., free will of rational creatures), namely, “a means of exploring the range of inherent potentialities,” which when bound in relation to God, such exploration results in the “great emerging drama” of “a narrative that begins in chaos and ends in harmony” (Wessling and Rasmussen 2015, 295 and 297). With randomness incorporated into God's activities, theistic determinism is averted.…”