"Some have said that the laws of nature are simply accidental results of the way the universe cooled after the big bang. But, as Rees has pointed out, even such accidents can be regarded as secondary manifestations of deeper laws governing the ensemble of universes. Again, even the evolution of the laws of nature and changes to the constants follow certain laws. 'We’re still left with the question of how these "deeper" laws originated. No matter how far you push back the properties of the universe as somehow "emergent," their very emergence has to follow certain prior laws.'1 So multiverse or not, we still have to come to terms with the origin of the laws of nature. And the only viable explanation here is the divine Mind.”
—Antony Flew (There is a God, pp. 121-122.)
1. Martin Rees, “Exploring Our Universe and Others,” in The Frontiers of Space (New York: Scientific American, 2000), 87.
Sunday, July 29, 2012
Blog Archive
-
▼
2012
(413)
-
▼
July
(35)
- Thinker Profile: David Hume
- Apologist Interview: Dave Sterrett
- Antony Flew on Multiverse Theory
- Book Review: Heresy: A History of Defending the Tr...
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (07/20 - 07/27)
- Read Along: Chapter 18— Why Jesus Instead of the F...
- How to Get Apologetics in Your Church 2: When Apol...
- Why Does God Allow Tragedy and Suffering?
- Terminology Tuesday: Sin
- Apologist Interview: Alex McFarland (part 2)
- C.S. Lewis on the Question of Truth
- Book Review: Come Let Us Reason: New Essays in Chr...
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (07/13 - 07/20)
- Read Along: Chapter 17— What Good Is Christianity?
- How to Get Apologetics in Your Church 2: Implement...
- Lectures on the Canon by Michael J. Kruger
- Terminology: Reconciliation
- Apologist Interview: Alex McFarland (part 1)
- Charles Spurgeon on the Gospel
- Book Review: Reading God's World: The Scientific V...
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (07/06 - 07/13)
- Read Along: Ch 16—Is Evil Only a Problem for Chris...
- How to Get Apologetics in Your Church 2: Questions...
- Douglas Jacoby vs Richard Carrier Debate: Jesus—So...
- Terminology Tuesday: Propitiation
- Philosopher Interview: Richard Swinburne
- Daniel B. Wallace on the New Testament Documents
- Book Review: On the Meaning of Sex by J. Budziszewski
- Weekly Apologetics Bonus Links (06/29 - 07/06)
- Read Along: Ch 15—Can People Be Good Without God?
- How to Get Apologetics in Your Church 2: Evangelis...
- Do the Gospels Contradict? by Michael Licona
- Terminology Tuesday: Retribution
- Author Interview: David Glass
- William Dembski on Chance
-
▼
July
(35)
2 comments :
Great quote there. The *philosophical* multiverse really doesn't help the atheist's way around a designer. It's either down the path of an infinite regression of universes (to illogically sidestep the uncaused cause e. g. God) or just accept that all the laws of the universe have a law giver.
When atheists enter the fields of origins to prove the world only "appears" designed and discover the hidden Math is even more designed than appearance we have corresponding proof of design.
When all of mankind throughout history believes in God in one form or another AND science discovers this independent fine tuning--something no one even factored into their belief in God in the first place..we have a slam dunk and all is left is a bunch of weirdos who deny their own Data. Its just embarrassing at this point to even discuss their absurd cowardly denials.
Post a Comment
Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.