 | The Argument from Design A reading from William Paley's Natural Theology for my introduction to philosophy class. |
 | Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith - Logos in Nature "The extreme raity of transitional forms in the fossils record persists as the trade secret of paleontology, the evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." Stephen J. Gould, Natural History, Vol. 86, pgs 22,30 "Dr. A.E. Wilder-Smith was one of few scientists in the world to have three earned doctorates. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry and a NATO three-star general. A devout born-again Christian, a devoted husband and father of 5 children, a young-earth creationist, and a highly qualified organic chemist, he authored over 70 scientific publications and more than 30 books, some published in 17 languages. Many of today's leading creationists consider him a major influence in their own intellectual development, and call him a pioneer in anti-evolution arguments. See http://wildersmith.org/testimonials.htm for testimonies about Wilder-Smith by Duane Gish and other intellectuals and scientists. He was not only an expert on chemotherapy, pharmacology, organic chemistry, and biochemistry, but a gifted teacher and popular public speaker. He appeared prominently in an award-winning creation film series called 'Origins: How the World Came to Be' (at http://christiananswers.net/catalog/or-vs.html). Wilder-Smith is probably responsible for Richard Dawkins refusing to debate creationists any more. In 1986, he and E. Andrews debated the two leading evolutionists in Britain, Dawkins and J. Maynard Smith (the two strongest Darwinians in Europe), at Oxford (this debate is on CD at http://www.sermonaudio.com/source_prodinfo.asp?PID=ad81206173621). More at http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_5.htm ********************************** +++ Some additional info (you may want to add): http://www.creationsafaris.com/wgcs_5.htm = http://snipurl.com/1pz0b With charming simplicity he could be found discussing comfortably everything from black holes to one-handed molecules, or Shannon information theory, time dilation, DNA transcription, AIDS, criminal psychology, history, natural theology, natural selection or why God allows suffering. As a highly qualified organic chemist, Wilder-Smith was uniquely positioned to critique so-called 'chemical evolution.' His effectiveness stemmed not from vituperative ability or rhetoric, but rather -- because of his intimate acquaintance with the facts of chemistry. He won the "Golden Apple" award three years in a row at the University of Illinois Medical Center for the best course of lectures. To the consternation of his scientific colleagues, here was a young-earth creationist they could not pigeonhole as an ignoramus. He could not only hold his own among the best of them, he could make his opponents turn tail and run for cover. As a highly qualified organic chemist, Wilder-Smith was uniquely positioned to critique so-called "chemical evolution." This kindly gentleman was merciless in his attacks on Miller, Oparin, Fox and other evolutionists who claimed to be making progress explaining life's origin by chance and necessity. His effectiveness stemmed not from vituperative ability or rhetoric, but rather - because of his intimate acquaintance with the facts of chemistry - from calm, rational dismantling of the philosophical and scientific assumptions underlying his opponents' errors: i.e., from scientific arguments that could not be denied by any knowledgeable chemist. Dr. Wilder-Smith was one of the first to emphasize the necessity for one-handed molecules to hold genetic information (see online book), and to apply the laws of thermodynamics and equilibrium to discussions of the origin of life. He argued that creation was scientific and naturalistic evolution was unscientific. With charming simplicity he could be found discussing comfortably everything from black holes to one-handed molecules, or Shannon information theory, time dilation, DNA transcription, AIDS, criminal psychology, history, natural theology, natural selection or why God allows suffering. He was no mere talking head. A devoted husband and father of five children, a devout born-again Christian, and an unquestionably capable scientist, he left no chinks in his armor. To the consternation of his scientific colleagues, here was a young-earth creationist they could not pigeonhole as an ignoramus. He could not only hold his own among the best of them, he could make his opponents turn tail and run for cover. Wilder-Smith authored over 70 scientific publications and more than 30 books, some of which have been published in 17 languages and are still in print. Many of today's leading creationist consider him a major influence in their own intellectual development, and call him a pioneer in anti-evolution arguments. |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 1 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.1 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 1 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 2 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.2 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 2 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 3 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.3 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 3 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 4 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.4 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 4 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 5 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.5 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 5 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 8 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.8 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 8 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 6 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.6 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 6 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 7 of 8) DESIGNATION: Philosophy of Religion 2 - Natural Theology 1.7 TITLE: The Modal Ontological Argument (Part 7 of 8) AUTHOR: Rayndeon (also known as "Dante Alighieri") DATE: December 1, 2007 DESCRIPTION: This video critically examines the modern modal ontological argument for the existence of God. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: http://analyticabstraction.blogspot.com/2007/11/philosophy-of-religion-2-natural_14.html |
 | RC Sproul Debates Greg Bahnsen on Apologetics http://blogtv.com/Shows/44572 http://Godnoliar.com/Sproul_vs_Bahnsen.htm BAHNSEN SHOWS THAT SPROUL IS AN AGNOSTIC. Bahnsen said: If you have only probability -- if you have only probability that the Bible is the Word of God, or that God exists or all the rest -- that must mean at least this -- that while there are many reasons to think that the Bible is the Word of God, there are some to think that it's not. As, if there were no reasons to think that the Bible's not the Word of God, it wouldn't be probability it would be certainty. And so when RC [Sproul] or any old Princeton Apologist says, "That very probably the Bible is the Word of God," he is also saying there's a slight probability that it's not -- slight. You may think the probability that it is, is greater than the other -- although, I dare say, nobody knows how to rate probability, when it comes to those kind of arguments. So saying one is more than the other doesn't get anywhere -- everybody's lost in a sea of skepticism -- if it's only probability. But even if you could say that there's a greater probability that the Bible is the Word of God, than it's not, you're still saying that there's some reason to think that it's not. QUESTION TO SPROUL FROM STUDENT Angus Gillespie -- of the South Carolina Gillespies. You can know nothing for certain -- empirically or inductively, correct? That's what your saying? Then, you [RC Sproul] can't know anything at all, for certain, right? It seems to me, though, that the Scripture -- and here it get back to the same argument I suppose -- that Scripture does say you can know certainly. That, over and over again, the Scripture writers say, "These things are written, so that you can know certainly." And that are...we are... You state that men know certainly that God exists. But you can't know for certain, that men know certainly God exists. You seem to end up in the same Skepticism that Gordon Clark does. I was wondering what your thoughts on that would be? SPROUL ADMITS HE IS AGNOSTIC Sproul response: Again, let me repeat the difference between how the word "certainty" is used. The Bible speaks of having assurance. I have a blessed assurance. But my knowledge of what the Bible is, and what the Bible says, is fallible, 'cause I'm less than omniscient [all knowing]. When I'm talking about certainty, I'm talking about philosophical certainty, in a very technically defined manner. And in that sense I don't have certainty about anything, even that I'm right here. Deduction -- I think, can give us far more certainty than Greg [Bahnsen] allows, in terms of the relationship of propositions, and the laws of immediate inference and that sort of thing. But, I grant, that that's even then, only if rationality is valid. And the only way you can have rationality valid -- I've already yielded, is that ultimately that God exists. But I cannot know for certainty -- you know, that God exists. I can have full assurance of heart -- when the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit comes, you see -- I look at the evidence, and I know the evidence is overwhelming -- the Holy Spirit tells me, "Hey, that evidence is for true, that's for real," -- you know? Cool. How do I know for sure, that the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit isn't indigestion? I'm playing the Devil's Advocate now. I have to deal with pagans every day, and not just Christians. And, I'm not going to go up to them and say, "Because I say so." And that's what you're left with. And that gives you precious little certainty. 'Cause then in the final analysis all I have is the autonomy of your presupposition about the boldest assertion the world has ever heard -- the existence of God. And I want to know -- How you escape subjectivism -- I want to know -- How you escape fideism -- I haven't heard it yet. I keep hearing denials about fideism. Fideism historically means the rejection of natural theology, by definition. You know, historically going all the way back to Cusanus, right up through the history of philosophy, the term fideism has meant, that any knowledge of God must come -- not through natural theology but through faith -- I've heard all night, that we don't come through natural theology, we do come through faith, but where not fideists. I'm absolutely bewildered at that point. |
 | Theology of the Body, self-control The good Cardinal talks about self-control, our necessary cooperation with God and respect for natural law as a logical step for all people of good will as he reflects some more on Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body. www.arinzewebcast.com |
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
