Apologetics Lane

This is a video is based on the book The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards. Any well stocked library will I have a copy of the book. Many of the local public libraries around me do.

The book and video argue for a simultaneous correlation between the cosmic and terrestrial conditions that make rational sentient life possible on earth with that sentient life on earth to be able to make otherwise unlikely scientific discoveries. The evidence seems to suggest that a cosmic designer intended to both promote sentient life on earth and have that rational sentient life make scientific discoveries about the universe and so to ask deep questions about origins. This obviously has theological and theistic implications.

Some of the common objections to the Privileged Planet Hypothesis include the following:

1. If we humans didn't exist on earth, we wouldn't be around recognize how much we're able to discovery. Therefore the hypothesis is moot.

2. The hypothesis only makes its conclusions based on the sample size of one example (i.e. humans on earth in this universe) rather than multiple sentient beings on various planets and various universes. Therefore you cannot gauge apparent designed advantages or disadvantages.

3.If we were able to make much fewer scientific discoveries, people could still propose the hypothesis because we wouldn't know how much more discoveries were possible. Therefore, one can't determine the existence of or gauge the intentions of a cosmic designer. Conversely, maybe there are many more scientific discoveries we could have made if things were slightly different. Therefore, that too would make it difficult (or impossible) to determine the existence of or gauge the intentions of a designer. Maybe by design or by bad luck (if there is no designer) we're being "cheated" out of a vast amount of scientific knowledge and discovery. But we wouldn't even know it even if it were true.

4. In essence, the Privileged Planet hypothesis is basically painting concentric target circles wherever the arrows have landed. So, of course you get apparent coincidental and remarkable 'hits'.

The problem with these objections are similar to objections to the fine-tuning of the universe. See for example this video by William Lane Craig where he gives a useful analogy. Or this analogy explained by Deborah Haarsma. It seems to me that what these objections forget (or at least under appreciate) is all the ways in which it so happens we are able to make scientific discoveries because it JUST SO HAPPENS that certain conditions are such that we can make those discoveries.

Here's an analogy that can of help us appreciate the good fortune we have. Imagine a boy who wants to learn more about the world around him and he secretly discloses this to a newly made rich friend of his financially strapped poor father. The boy unfortunately has difficulty seeing objects both far and near. Then one day a package is dropped at his front door. The package so happens to have a pair of bifocal eyeglasses inside it. He tries them on and they enable him to see much better. In fact, they seem to almost perfectly be the right prescription. As the days go by, he continues to get more and more packages. One day he receives a magnifying glass. Another day he receives a telescope. Later a microscope. Another day he receives a miniature model car which he has to assemble and along with the car are trifocal and multifocal lenswear which he can use to help him assemble it. Now given the scenario, wouldn't it be reasonable for him to conclude that it was his father's rich friend who was sending him these gifts so that he could pursue his passion for discovery rather than that packages were accidentally being dropped off at his house? Even if the the packages were dropped off at the wrong house, one could conclude that they were being dropped off intentionally for the purpose of someone making discoveries and doing science. True, he wasn't receiving volumes of an encyclopedia on a regular basis. He had to make the discoveries for himself. But the point of the analogy should be obvious. Without those tools to enhance his vision, he wouldn't be able to see the things he does and make the discoveries he did. Similarly, there are many coincidences in our earthly circumstance that serendipitously work out for our scientific advantage. And just because the child didn't get access to better investigative tools (e.g. surveillance aircrafts, the Hubble space telescope, or to an electron microscope) doesn't negate the fact that he DOES have equipment that enhances his vision. When it was more probabilistically likely that the child (or we humans on planet earth) should have not had such advantages.

If I understand Gonzalez correctly, of the 65 places in our solar system where one can observe solar eclipses, "it's an amazing coincidence [that] the one place that has observers is the one place that has the best eclipses." http://youtu.be/-mdjM4-gRGg?t=7m25s

Here are various YouTube links to the video.

https://youtu.be/QmIc42oRjm8
The Privileged Planet

http://youtu.be/JnWyPIzTOTw

in 12 parts

http://youtu.be/kF4mMHqfw8A

with Spanish subtitles (full video)

Darwin's Dilemma

http://youtu.be/xxh9o32m5c0
with some European language subtitle (full video)

Unlocking the Mystery of Life

http://youtu.be/VekUf325SHM

More recommendations:

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

"The Moon's Divine Design" Creation Update radio with Hugh Ross (Jan. 4, 2005)
http://c450903.r3.cf2.rackcdn.com/2005/cu255.mp3

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

A MIGRATION HEADACHE….For Evolutionists

The book A MIGRATION HEADACHE….For Evolutionists was written by cultist leader Garner Ted Armstrong (February 9, 1930 – September 15, 2003). I do not endorse the theology of Armstrongism. Though I did 20 years ago. I am now an orthodoxy Evangelical Protestant (specifically Calvinistic in soteriology, and Charismatic in pneumatology). Nevertheless, I have always considered his book on migration really interesting. When I first read it years ago, it got me thinking about how amazingly complex and mysterious animal and insect migration is. I don't know how accurate the factual claims made in the book are, but the general gist of his argument for why migration is problematic for evolution is thought provoking, at the very least. Here's a link to his book.

http://www.garnertedarmstrong.org/pubs/Migration.htm

See also Evolution News & Science Today's tag on "Migration"
https://evolutionnews.org/tag/migration/

Sunday, May 26, 2013

The 33,000 Protestant Denominations Lie

https://youtu.be/n_ZXbrbfXrY

James White disproving the commonly stated falsehood made by Catholics as to how Sola Scriptura directly led to over 30,000 Protestant denominations.

We [CATHOLICS] Need to Stop Saying That There Are 33,000 Protestant Denominations

30,000 Protestant Denominations? by Eric Svendsen

30,000 Protestant Denominations and Counting

Unity And The Number Of Denominations by Jason Engwer

From the Alpha and Omega Ministries Blog:

The 33,000 Denominations Myth by James White (2007)

The Catholic Myth of 33,000 Protestant Denominations is Alive and Well by James Swan (2009)

It's not 33,000 Protestant Denominations, But Millions by James Swan (2010)

The 33,000 (Woops, Now 36,000) Denominations Lie Exposed...Again by James White (2012)

Saturday, May 25, 2013

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

The Trinity in the Old Testament

https://youtu.be/BNt5NKSse0Y