Untwisting Skeptics - Design Argument does not assume God.
"Finally, if you disregard all of the above, we’re ultimately comparing the probability that a universe with incredibly fortunate physical qualities arose naturally to the probability that it was designed by an even more complex, exotic, powerful, hypothetical entity with no origin at all. That might be a contest if the existence of the other entity were assumed, but you can’t take that liberty when the whole point of the discussion is to establish that entity’s existence." -- http://asktheatheist.com/?p=757
The atheist is confused. He is comparing gravity an impersonal force with the personal God. Secondly he is comparing what "arose" or "came into being" with God, who has no origin at all. We are not assuming God, but deducting God from the fact that the Universe is fine tuned to a degree which demands a being who is larger than it and who transcends time.
The atheist is making a straw man argument. He is saying that theist are assuming God before proving it through design argument. The design argument is an argument whose 'conclusion' is that God exists because of the tremendous design seen in nature. The design argument does not assume God. That is a very bad understanding of the design argument.
Once famous atheist Anthony Flew became a theist after considering the design argument.
"Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God." - Antony Flew, There is a God (New York: HarperOne, 2007) p. 95
"I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence. I believe that this universe's intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God. I believe that life and reproduction originate in a divine Source . . . Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than a half century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from modern science. Science spotlights three dimensions of nature that point to God. The first is the fact that nature obeys laws. The second is the dimension of life, of intelligently organized and purpose-driven beings, which arose from matter. The third is the very existence of nature. But it is not science alone that has guided me. I have also been helped by a renewed study of the classical philosophical arguments . . . I must stress that my discovery of the Divine has proceeded on a purely natural level, without any reference to supernatural phenomena. It has been an exercise in what is traditionally called natural theology In short, my discovery of the Divine has been a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith." --- Anthony Flew, There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.(New York: HarperOne, 2007)
When this question was posted in Christian Apologetics Alliance facebook group, I got the following responses:
"Why assume God is more complex than the universe? What does that even mean? Does he have moving parts? The problem with atheism is that it will always move its goal posts. 150 years ago, the universe was eternal, infinite, and biological life was simple and expected everywhere. The opposite is reality. Now God, who by definition needs no explanation because He is the Prime Mover, needs an explanation and a mover. It's just silly and disingenuous." - Bud Harris
"First of all, fine tuning confirms God's existence. Using Bayesian probability, fine tuning makes God's existence (or at least the hypothesis that God exists) more probable than it otherwise would be. Also, the hypothesis of theism is remarkable simple: positing a single being with properties that are infinite (as opposed to a finite arbitrary limit), and while God's mind contains complex ideas, it is remarkably simple, not being composed of various parts." --V Michael D Gankevich
The atheist is confused. He is comparing gravity an impersonal force with the personal God. Secondly he is comparing what "arose" or "came into being" with God, who has no origin at all. We are not assuming God, but deducting God from the fact that the Universe is fine tuned to a degree which demands a being who is larger than it and who transcends time.
The atheist is making a straw man argument. He is saying that theist are assuming God before proving it through design argument. The design argument is an argument whose 'conclusion' is that God exists because of the tremendous design seen in nature. The design argument does not assume God. That is a very bad understanding of the design argument.
Once famous atheist Anthony Flew became a theist after considering the design argument.
"Although I was once sharply critical of the argument to design, I have since come to see that, when correctly formulated, this argument constitutes a persuasive case for the existence of God." - Antony Flew, There is a God (New York: HarperOne, 2007) p. 95
"I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence. I believe that this universe's intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God. I believe that life and reproduction originate in a divine Source . . . Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than a half century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture, as I see it, that has emerged from modern science. Science spotlights three dimensions of nature that point to God. The first is the fact that nature obeys laws. The second is the dimension of life, of intelligently organized and purpose-driven beings, which arose from matter. The third is the very existence of nature. But it is not science alone that has guided me. I have also been helped by a renewed study of the classical philosophical arguments . . . I must stress that my discovery of the Divine has proceeded on a purely natural level, without any reference to supernatural phenomena. It has been an exercise in what is traditionally called natural theology In short, my discovery of the Divine has been a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith." --- Anthony Flew, There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.(New York: HarperOne, 2007)
When this question was posted in Christian Apologetics Alliance facebook group, I got the following responses:
"Why assume God is more complex than the universe? What does that even mean? Does he have moving parts? The problem with atheism is that it will always move its goal posts. 150 years ago, the universe was eternal, infinite, and biological life was simple and expected everywhere. The opposite is reality. Now God, who by definition needs no explanation because He is the Prime Mover, needs an explanation and a mover. It's just silly and disingenuous." - Bud Harris
"First of all, fine tuning confirms God's existence. Using Bayesian probability, fine tuning makes God's existence (or at least the hypothesis that God exists) more probable than it otherwise would be. Also, the hypothesis of theism is remarkable simple: positing a single being with properties that are infinite (as opposed to a finite arbitrary limit), and while God's mind contains complex ideas, it is remarkably simple, not being composed of various parts." --V Michael D Gankevich
Comments
Post a Comment