Jonathan McLatchie Responds to Richard Carrier's Objections to Undesigned Coincidences

Rounding Off My Response to Richard Carrier On Undesigned Coincidences (Part 6) by Jonathan McLatchie
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2020/04/rounding-off-my-response-to-richard.html

Part 6 links to parts 1-5.


See also the links and videos at my blogpost:

Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences
https://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/05/undesigned-scriptural-coincidences.html

Mimicry in Nature as Evidence for Design

While mimicry in the animal and plant world isn't absolute proof of design in nature, it is evidence. I'll leave it up to you to determine to what degree since some aspects of mimicry can be explained by natural selection. Nevertheless, I'm going to post some pictures of mimicry in nature. Mimicry can include similarities in appearance, behaviour, sound, scent and location. Here's a link to Wikipedia's article on Mimicry.

Here are some examples of "leaf insects"

Owl Butterflies can look like owl heads or snake heads

Doctrine of Creation: Excursus on Creation and Evolution by William Lane Craig

Video lectures Parts 1 through 21

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elZ2V715cqc&feature=share&list=PLIpO3BUiq2IFry-4WVT76GJIlQREcrzge

What we still don't know with Martin Rees

 

https://youtu.be/oyH2D4-tzfM

This is not a Christian video, but it does show how fine-tuned the universe is. Here's one quote:

"The cosmological constant needs to be set to one part in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion" [found at 18 minutes into the video]


See also the videos here:
The Big Bang, Multiverses, and the Anthropic Principle Discussed by William Lane Craig misclane.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-big-bang-multiverses-and-anthropic.html

The Big Bang, Multiverses, and the Anthropic Principle Discussed by William Lane Craig

 

https://youtu.be/-J5D7R3pyro

Part 1 of 2

 

https://youtu.be/jyQMGBmPkdI

Part 2 of 2




Did We Just Get Lucky?

 

https://youtu.be/UloJeQbxHTo

Besides the objections to the World Ensemble that Craig made in the above videos, here are other features of the world in which we live that make the concept of the world ensemble less plausible as an explanation of the fine-tuning we find in the universe. 

1. The correlation between life and scientific discovery (i.e. the Privileged Planet Hypothesis)

2. Gratuitous beauty. For example of the beauty of butterflies. I recommend watching the DVD video Metamorphosis: The Beauty and Design of Butterflies (here's a preview)

3. Gratuitous pleasures. For example, think of all the various molecules and chemicals needed to produce delicious food.  For the possible existence of such molecules and chemicals requires the fine-tuning of the universe that we have. But just because a universe is fine-tuned, it doesn't necessitate that there be such chemicals or molecules. That's just one of the various pleasures in the world.

4. Multiple brains or minds that can interact with each other. The probabilities of multiple observers in one universe is less likely than just one Boltzmann brain existing in a delusional solipsism. If you believe in multiple minds in this universe, then that makes the world ensemble less likely as the explanation for this universe's fine-tuning.

5. The possibility of rational creatures being able to reproduce to multiply the number of rational creatures in existence.

6. Gratuitous sense of morality among sentient rational creatures.

7. Gratuitous sense of love among sentient rational creatures.

8. Given quantum mechanics and the multiverse theory things popping into existence (seemingly causelessly) is not only possible but likely. Yet, why don't we see such things occur publicly on a regular basis?

9. Even superheroes might actually exist (see for example HERE, and HERE [#5] ). Why don't we see them in our universe? As a Christian I believe there are supernatural entities like angels and demons who affect the world in hidden covert ways. Some might ask why I don't believe they might actually be these entities that the multiverse allows for? Given an atheistic version of the multiverse theory, that's a possibility. But why do these entities seem walk on a thin line between over and covert activities rather than manifesting publicly? Their behavior seems to be more in line with a Christian theistic worldview (with or without a multiverse) than an atheistic multiverse worldview. In the Christian worldview angels don't want to attract attention to themselves, but rather to God. While God has his purposes for veiling his existence to some degree or another (see for example HERE and HERE). Also, in a Christian worldview demons only want to attract attention to themselves only if it will lead to greater evil. If demons openly revealed themselves it would lead more people out of atheism. Something which demons wouldn't want. Demons would want humans to either not believe in them (and so allow for atheists to continue on their way to hell); or they would want humans to believe in them so that they either live in fear of them or think they have power over demons to do their bidding. When in actuality they are doing the malevolent will of those demons.

I personally don't believe that the concept of a multiverse is necessarily inconsistent with Christianity. What I do object to is appealing to the multiverse to explain fine-tuning away (and hence remove the need for a personal Creator).

Related videos




https://youtu.be/5c97Peb50IA
How Could One Argue that the Universe Didn't Have A Cause?

https://youtu.be/TK-X3x9tyqY
What about Multiverses and Parallel Universes due to Chance?

 

https://youtu.be/7FS78DPliLM

Does the World Ensemble Hypothesis Violate the Canons of Science?
(here Craig honestly admits that we should take the multiverse theory seriously)




Would Multiple Universes Undermine God? Interview of Robin Collins
Part 1. http://youtu.be/u9VE8dF6zDw
Part 2. http://youtu.be/QGEPGF-09Wc


More videos of Robin Collins being interviewed:
http://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/06/robin-collins-interviews.html

 

https://youtu.be/Gj_fLi_K7jA

 Is [It] True? Fine-Tuning the Universe - Robin Collins at Pepperdine



See also This Blog:
Intelligent Design videos by Illustra Media
misclane.blogspot.com/2013/05/intelligent-design-videos-by-illustra.html  

Fine-Tuning for Life in the Universe by Hugh Ross
http://www.reasons.org/articles/fine-tuning-for-life-in-the-universe

RTB Design Compendium (2009)
http://www.reasons.org/articles/rtb-design-compendium-2009


Scientific Evidence for the Christian Faith - Hugh Ross, PhD
http://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/12/scientific-evidence-for-christian-faith.html


What to Read: The Fine-Tuning of the Universe for Intelligent life
http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/what-to-read-the-fine-tuning-of-the-universe-for-intelligent-life/  

The Fine Tuning Argument in 12 Quick Points
http://www.saintsandsceptics.org/the-fine-tuning-argument-in-12-quick-points/ 

 

https://youtu.be/mT3R-WSN1XQ

 The Multiverse and the Christian Faith | Jeff Zweerink, PhD

Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences

Here are links to J.J. Blunt's classic book:

 Undesigned Coincidences in the Writings Both of the Old and New Testaments, An Argument of Their Veracity; With an Appendix

http://biblecourses.com.au/blunt/index.html

or

http://www.archive.org/details/undesignedcoinci1851blun

or

http://books.google.com/books?id=g8hCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PR1#v=onepage&q&f=false



Here's are links to lectures by Tim McGrew on this topic. I'm not sure if any of the lectures are duplicates.

http://apologetics315.blogspot.com/2011/04/undesigned-coincidences-in-gospels-by.html

http://www.evidence4faith.com/shows/e4f-042411.mp3
http://youtu.be/9wUcrwYocgM

Here's a series of articles by Tim McGrew on Undesigned Coincidences:
Part ONE
Part TWO
Part THREE
Part FOUR
Part FIVE
Part SIX

A related work that touches upon these issues is Edmund Bennett's book The Four Gospels from a Lawyer’s Standpoint (1893)


In honestly I have to say that some of the force of the arguments that both Blunt and McGrew make are weakened if you take into consideration how tradition in the early Christian community (during the times when the Gospels were being written) could account for some of the coincidences. Along with that, the theory of Markan Priority can account for some of the coincidences. In other words, if we assume that Mark was the first Gospel written, then Matthew and Luke borrow from Mark, while John was written last (and probably with the awareness of the prior three), then some of the coincidences aren't that startling. The theory of Markan Priority isn't necessarily true, but a conservative Christian can consistently consider it as possibly true without compromising his beliefs. I myself lean toward Markan Priority (but not dogmatic on it). While Most liberal and conservative scholars hold to Markan Priority, not all do. For example, Messianic Jewish scholar Arnold Fruchtenbaum holds to Matthean Priority.


Update:

Ehrman vs McGrew on Undesigned Coincidences

Jonathan McLatchie Responds to Richard Carrier's Objections to Undesigned Coincidences