Dembski discusses the patterns of information that are problems for materialism:

“The problem for materialism and empiricism in reconstituting the world, whether in terms of elemental matter or elemental sensory experiences respectively, is ultimately informational. When we do science, we don’t encounter matter in its raw state nor do we encounter sensory experiences in their raw state. Rather, we encounter certain patterns to the exclusion of others [Dembski’s “small probabilities” selected by an intelligent mind]. In other words, we encounter information. The material and sensory features associated with these patterns are secondary. Indeed, those very features are themselves patterned and thus informational. The patterns, or equivalently the types of information conveyed, are primary.”

Dembski cites cybernetics founder, Norbert Weiner, who “thought that information could not be subsumed under matter: ‘Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day.’”

Dembski addresses God’s creations as teleological:

“. . . from the vantage of Christian theism, I . . . see nature as a created order endowed by its creator with certain powers, all of which may be regarded as teleological since they were intended by God. But Christianity goes further, holding to a supernatural deity, with God acting in ways that transcend nature’s inherent powers. . . . Christian theism therefore regards nature as inherently incomplete, finding its completion in God. . . . Christian theism is compatible with God delegating to nature many of its powers (cf. the medieval distinction between primary and secondary causes, secondary causes operating under their own power, instituted by the primary cause, God).”

Dembski presents an interesting and informative discussion of intelligence as it relates to nature:

“In everyday experience, we distinguish between two sources of information: intelligence and nature. . . . an intelligence, to advance a purpose, may identify one possibility to the exclusion of others and thereby produce information. Alternatively, nature, as a system of causes and effects, may bring about some event to the exclusion of others, and thereby produce information. . . . a human intelligence, to advance a purpose, performs a conceptual act, identifying one possibility to the exclusion of others. Such an act requires thought and consciousness, and yet in humans makes use of neurophysiology [encoded spike trains of action potentials that transmit information through synaptic networks, as discussed in my books and specific blog posts], which in turn is part of nature. Human intelligence may therefore be regarded as natural even if it is not purely material. . . . According to information theorist Douglas Robertson, the defining characteristic of intelligent agents . . . is their ability to create and communicate information. That’s what intelligences do for a living. . . . it follows that if nature is itself the act of a creative intelligence, then nature is a form of information and nature’s operations may themselves be regarded as intelligent and teleological. Nature’s intelligence would in that case be a derived intelligence. . . . Because materialism gives primacy to matter, it downgrades the role of intelligence in nature, conceiving of nature in purely material terms, thus making intelligence a byproduct of material nature rather than its source and purpose. Materialism sees matter as fundamentally non-intelligent, and it thus needs to constitute intelligence out of matter.”

I cite Dembski, who states, “As a Christian theist, I’m happy to regard the collection of all possible worlds as residing in the mind of God and then see God, in an act of creation, as actualizing one world, ours, to the exclusion of others. . . . Unlike materialism, which makes matter the starting point for inquiry, information makes the actual world and the possibilities associated with it the starting point. Information thus allows the world to be whatever it is. . . . We know that a world exists and that it realizes certain possibilities to the exclusion of others, thereby generating information.”

“[Dembski’s] argument is that intelligence creates information, which in turn can manifest itself materially, and that intelligence is thus the preeminent first cause. This puts matter causally downstream from both intelligence and information, making it a subordinate and derivative concept. . . .Dembski not only takes information to be the fundamental substance, but also clearly believes . . . that this substance ultimately originates with a personal God who intentionally gives being to the world, ordering its material structure and guiding its inhabitants for a purpose.”

I will now post selected excerpts from Dembski’s book, Being as Communion: A Metaphysics of Information, some of which I have included in my books and have made reference to in blogs. I strongly recommend this book to those who wish to understand the theory of communication. “For a thing to be real it must be able to communicate with other things. If this is so, then the problem of being receives a straightforward resolution: to be is to be in communion.” [Taken from the back cover piece] Dembski compellingly documents that “information in nature is ‘communion,’” and this extends to communion between the Mind of God and the mind of Man by the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

I am sharing a quote from Christof Lameter, whom I cited in my second book:

“If God can act in reality through coordinating large amounts of quantum events for a purpose at a higher level then it is possible to assume that the same can be done with the human brain. God can effectively communicate with humans by direct stimulation of neurons in the human brain generating images and memories. God is able to communicate with humans in a direct way. May this be an explanation for the working of the Holy Spirit? Visions and other religious experiences could be understood through this process.”

I cite Alvin Plantinga in my second book who also addresses the openness of the universe to novel information. Here are my comments:

Plantinga states that classical science does not claim that the universe is causally closed. His statements are consistent with special divine action in the world. Just as God, who is immaterial and Spirit, can act in the physical universe, so too can the immaterial minds of human beings. There is no objection to special divine action or for human free action, dualistically conceived. Plantinga goes further to state that the indeterminism of quantum mechanics offers even less of a problem for divine action than classical science. “. . . special divine action . . . is by no means incompatible with quantum mechanics . . . because . . . quantum mechanics doesn’t determine a specific outcome for a given set of initial conditions, but instead merely assigns probabilities to the possible outcomes.” Plantinga states further, “Perhaps He is also very much a hands on God, constantly active in history, leading, guiding, persuading and redeeming His people, blessing them with ‘the internal Witness of the Holy Spirit’ (Calvin) or ‘the Internal instigation of the Holy Spirit’ (Acquinas) and conferring upon them the gift of faith.”

In my studies and writings I have relied significantly upon the work of William A. Dembski. I am sharing his comments that consider how God, who is immaterial and Spirit, interacts with the material world, including the human brain. Quantum mechanics gives nondeterminism to the universe which characterizes it as being informationally open and accommodating free will. Here is Dembski’s informative quote taken from my book, The Boundless Love of God: A Holy Spirit Story:

“. . . such [an open] universe will produce . . . patterns of events that stand out against the backdrop of randomness. . . . Such patterns [intended by God] could reasonably be interpreted as constituting novel information inputted from outside the system . . . in a nondeterministic universe, diving action could impart information into matter [e.g. a neural synaptic network] without violating any physical laws by which matter operates . . . A deity capable of co-opting randomness would impart information by arranging outcomes [with small probabilities and specification], but do so by channeling the material energy [e.g. of quantum tunneling in synaptic transmission] in ways that violate no principle governing matter. If divine action takes this form, the problem of finding the missing material energy by which God introduces novel information into the world simply does not arise. . . . information is then being transferred without any transfer of material energy. . . . Quantum mechanics . . . offers such a picture of the universe, allowing God free play at the quantum level. . . . In a world of irreducibly chance or random events [integral to the neural synapse], as some interpretations of quantum theory allow, [the Mind of] God can channel such events [and communications] toward preordained ends.”

Since the mind of Man is created in the image of the Mind of God, the postulate that Dembski shares reasonably applies to the immaterial mind of Man which can also channel communications of encoded information toward preordained ends with meaning and purpose.