But, I took the proof over to my friends in the Ask an Atheist discussion forum website, and their response was always the same. In essence, here it is -- and THAT is what this post is all about ...
"Peter, what you are pointing out to us is not really interesting at all. There is no such thing as 'a miracle.' Suppose a man is standing in Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia in front of an audience of 70,000 people, flipping a silver dollar ...
... and he flips the coin three hundred billion (300,000,000,000) times in a row, and IT COMES UP HEADS EVERY SINGLE TIME!!! Do you realize that there is nothing at all significant about that -- that nobody in the 70,000 person crowd should be even a little bit surprised, because 300,000,000,000 heads in a row is just ONE of the 300,000,000,000 possible outcomes of the coin tosses, EACH OF WHICH IS EQUALLY UNLIKELY. In other words, the 70,000 person audience should be equally astonished at a coin toss heads/tails series looking something like this ...
H T H H T T T H T T H H H H T H T T H T ...
Each outcome is equally entitled to a gasp from the crowd."
Okay. What is wrong with that argument?
I assume somewhere in your argument you introduced 'miracle' and that is why the miracle term was in their argument. I assume your argument mentioned 'odds of blah blah blah happening, and that is why they are using an odds/chance example to knock you down.
ReplyDeleteMy answer to 'what is wrong with that argument' is that, what does the existence of God have to do with odds? What does a miracle have to do with odds? 1st definition of MIRACLE in a given online dictionary is:a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency. (end of definition)
Tom make up my own absurd counter argument, a non miracle is, a volcano erupts and blows up, and in a 300 billion square foot area, 1 square foot area will be untouched, the other 299,999,999,999 square feet will be destroyed by this event. I was the only person there and survived, I was occupying that one square foot. NOT A MIRACLE (or perhaps it was but we can't tell as its mathematically arguable that I could have randomly chosen the same space that was in the end not destroyed, OR perhaps something external to randomness manipulated the natural order of things to make sure I didn't end up destroyed. so that's an either or, and its arguable that it was just happenstance. On the other hand, a volcano blows again, and a one mile wide chunk gets blown 5 miles high and comes down. I'm at ground zero where its going to land. I've said my final prayers, The falling mile wide chunk is close enough that it eclipses the sun, I'm in the shadow. ITs within 10 feet of me, then . . . it stops, not yet making contact with the ground, then a mouth nose eyes form on it and says 'excuse me, would you mind stepping about 1 mile over in THAT direction, I'll give you 15 minutes, so a good hurried paced walk will do, have a nice day . . .' at which point I quickly walk to safety. Once there, the chunk gently places itself on the ground . . .
THAT is a miracle and has zero to do with odds
So using odds to knock down the idea of miracle was inappropriate.
But likewise, if odds were introduced to help prove inductively the existence of God, that might be inappropriate too (if you did that). It sure makes a good 'oh gee wiz' moment to show absurdity of things ending up being the way they are without the direct intent of a maker/guidance/and other forces other than pure randomness. We;; with that tiny pinhole of a weakness in argument that perhaps that one open odd of one ten trillionth to one odd would have us end up this way, to the atheist, their argument is, well obviously, that one ten trillionth of an odd of things happening just right really did happen, and I know this because, well, HERE WE ARE . . . that will be stuck in their minds
I look forward to your inductive proof