Tom Gilson's Thinking Christian blog has a good write-up on Discover Magazine's current issue regarding the multiverse theory. It seems they just can't get away from God -- although are trying very hard."Call it a fluke, a mystery, a miracle. Or call it the biggest problem in physics. Short of invoking a benevolent creator, many physicists see only one possible explanation: Our universe may be but one of perhaps infinitely many universes in an inconceivably vast multiverse."
Be sure to keep up with Tom's blog for other good stuff.
5 comments :
Brian, if you listen to the atheists in the debates you post you'd know that a multiverse is a common atheist response to the design argument. Yet supposedly the multiverse is more evidence against atheism? Why didn't the Christians in the debates say that before?
I hear this a lot. You take a piece of evidence that runs exactly counter to Christian claims and just assert that no, in fact it is evidence in favor of Christian claims. I heard on Christian radio two days ago the claim that Ezekiel's prediction of the destruction of Tyre is proof of the accurate prophecy of the Bible. There are few clearer instances of a false prophecy. Faz Rana argues that the more we learn about the human genome the more we see God. In fact the genome is the most powerful evidence in favor of Darwinian evolutionary theory available. You guys are weird.
Jon, I think our readers would be interested in hearing your case for atheism based on the multiverse. Please could you elaborate?
You know what Brian, I'm afraid I may have misunderstood your post. I thought you were suggesting with your quote that multiverse theory is evidence in favor of God.
I'm not saying it's a positive argument for atheism. I'm saying it is a common atheistic response to the anthropic principle argument. Christians have historically dismissed this argument as speculative. Now it appears there may be some evidence in favor of it. This lends credence to the atheistic reply to the design argument for God. That means more credence for the atheistic position. But to defeat a theistic argument is not to prove theism false. I'm not claiming that.
As I said, I thought you were suggesting multiverse theory lends credence to theism when it seems to do the opposite. As I re-read you here though I think you're not saying that. You're saying (or your quote is saying) that multiverse theory is an effort to escape God.
I doubt that seriously, but I don't think you're claiming multiverse theory supports theism, so I guess I have no argument with you.
Did you read Tom Gilson's commentary?
Here is a short clip by Satyan Devadoss discussing the relationship between m-theory and belief in God. I think he does a pretty good job breaking it down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBpJ0a9o_J8
If you want to watch the full-length version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrWyj34WGFE
Post a Comment
Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.