Apologetics Diary Archive 1999c

Saturday 14 August 1999.

Dear diary,

I heard the ever counter-productive Hugh Ross on Focus on the Family on Radio Rhema on Wednesday night, and I hold him in just as low regard as I did before. He's an old-universe "Christian" astronomer, for those who had not yet heard of him, so yes, I do have major disagreements on his position. However, he and James Dobson didn't cover the age of the universe issue. My low opinion of Hugh Ross (and this talk in particular) was based on logical fallacies and scientific errors made by Ross during the discussion. Perhaps he was appealing to a low-brow audience who accept "proof by blatant assertion."

At this point I should explain that I did not catch the start of the talk, and it was only when they finished and James Dobson was wrapping up that they mentioned his name again, but I had already come to the conclusion that the guest was an idiot (and actually I did suspect that it was Hugh Ross).

The main point of the discussion was (apparently) to explain Ross's belief in the Anthropic Prinicple which basically says that the universe is the way it is (perfectly suited to human existance) because God specifically designed it that way*. Ross seems to have an incredible faith in this principle, making many claims that forces in the universe and many factors in the solar system could not be any different, or life could simply not exist.

*I believe this is the Strong version of the Anthropic Principle. The Weak Anthropic Principle states that the universe is the way it is because it is the way it is - if it was any different we would either not be here to wonder about it, or we would be sufficiently different to exist just as comfortably and still be asking why the universe is the way it is. I think I have these the right way around.

One example he gave was of the size of Jupiter. He claimed that it is sufficiently big enough to protect us from comet strikes, by both sucking comets in to itself and by deflecting comets out of the system so that they never pose a threat to us again. (Pity he didn't consider that it could also deflect comets towards us.) He also claimed that Jupiter was sufficiently small enough to not affect Earth's orbit - therefore Jupiter is absolutely the perfect size. Sorry Mr Ross, Jupiter does affect Earth's orbit. After Luna and Sol, Jupiter has the greatest affect on Earth's orbit (and tides) of any extra-terrestrial body.

Another example he gave was the design of the universe and life itself (DNA etc, I presume) proving that God is more intelligent than us. While it is true that God is more intelligent than us (covered elsewhere on the Internet), the use of "proof" is not warranted here - his argument is a logical fallacy. Where Ross was in error is perhaps difficult to understand without listening to the original talk and his exact words. Better design does not prove greater intelligence - normally it just means more time has been spent on the design. Take trains as an example. A modern bullet train has undoubtedly better design than the first steam train, but this does not mean the modern designers have greater intelligence than James Watt (who is widely credited with inventing the steam train, and was possibly one of the most intelligent men in the last 200 years - you've got to be pretty bright to get your name on lightbulbs, you know). Instead, the bullet train is the result of many decades of engineering work, not just the comparatively few years that James Watt took.

On the flip side, greater intelligence allows people to design things faster, and I believe that Hugh Ross mentioned this. However, he misrepresented our conceptions of God by doing so, for outside of the Bible we really have no idea how long God took to do anything related to creating the universe. The Bible presents God as saying (for example) "Let there be light" and there was. Instantly. This differs hugely from Hugh Ross's worldview in which God has apparently taken billions of years to get the universe to its current state.

Sorry Hugh, I still prefer God's Word to yours.

Wednesday 20 October 1999.

Dear diary,

Today I had an interesting conversation with someone from my work while we were on our way (slowly) to our cars at the end of the day. In that conversation he made the comment that the idea of spending eternity worshiping God sounded more like Hell to him. He didn't say it because he believes God exists but would rather "party with Satan," but rather to underline that he wouldn't want to spend eternity with God even if he did believe He exists.

He also said he would get bored after a while and want to do something else. In saying this he was making the mistake of applying time to eternity - a categorical mistake. Time does not exist in eternity. Eternity is outside of time. But that's beside the point, really.

When someone chooses not to believe something that is true, that doesn't mean it stops being true. God does exist, whether or not my work colleague chooses to believe in Him. Being with God for eternity is going to be better than words can describe, whether or not my work colleague chooses to try to understand that. But God gives each of us the choice where we spend eternity. Amen to that. Free choice is a good thing. God isn't going to force this guy to spend eternity doing something that he doesn't want to do.

The problem is that the alternative to praising God for eternity is being thrown into the Lake of Fire and suffering there for eternity. Whether or not one particular atheist chooses to believe the Lake of Fire even exists.

Some choice. But it's a choice he has made.

Sunday 21 November 1999.

Dear diary,

Last weekend I watched The Matrix (twice). Quite a movie, really - I guess I can see why that guy in Columbine dressed like Neo before going on his killing spree. I'm still glad I didn't see it in the theatres. As well as promoting incredible violence, the movie strongly supports the Eastern worldview which says that what we see around us doesn't really exist. This belief is self-defeating because it isn't actually liveable - walking in front of an oncoming bus isn't healthy no matter how much we believe it doesn't exist.

In some ways the movie's ideas are just subtly removed from Christian belief, in that the world we now live in is really just shadowlands compared to what Heaven will be like, and yet The Matrix had it around the wrong way. While they were in the Matrix, Neo and his friends were able to do more than they could in the real world.

Oh, how much longer?

Contact:
Return to ianman HOME | Return to top