{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023429179978700747, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.225165562913907, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Creation’s autonomy and the action of God

Thomas Jay Oord has recently proposed that God’s relationship to the world and its human inhabitants is well described as one of uncontrolling love, and that God is constitutionally incapable of intervening unilaterally in human lives. Consequently, prayer for God so to act is misjudged and inappropriate. This article argues that this conclusion runs counter to the biblical record, which sees God’s relationship with the world as sustaining and upholding, but also allowing for specific willed actions. However, God has given the world functional autonomy, which would be abrogated by interventions too predictable or too attributable. It is proposed that intervention by God is real and not uncommon, but often of concealed and unprovable provenance. God’s self-limitation with regard to intervention is seen as consistent but chosen, in contrast to Oord’s proposal of an ‘essential’ kenosis.