EXPLAIN THIS: The Miracle of Mathematics
There are two kinds of people in the world, those who like math and the rest of us sane people who find it difficult to get beyond basic everyday arithmetic. But all of us should be thankful for the fact of mathematics because without it, we wouldn’t have, among much else, most of the products of advanced technology we all depend upon every day.
Screenshot from YouTube.
As Philosopher William Lane Craig explains, mathematics is a big deal because it “lies at the foundation of transformative technologies like the personal computer and the color photograph. Its theorems led to the discovery of Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. The Laws of Physics are all represented in surprisingly elegant mathematical equations. Every invention, every advancement, owes mathematics a debt of gratitude. In fact, all of science relies on the assumption that we live in a mathematically imbued universe.”
But that raises some challenging questions, such as why is mathematics the way it is? Do we really think the elegance and predictive power of mathematics are realities as a result of chance? Craig explains in the following Reasonable Faith/Avoid Project video why mathematics is incredible evidence for the existence of God:
Just want to read the transcript of this video? Go here, then click on “SHOW MORE.”
Thanks to you and WLC again — insights from ineluctable quantum rabbit holes (e.g., Schroedinger’s cat stuff, two-slit experiment, break-down of the principle of local causes) also warrant knowledge of unpopular truths.
Anything you’d like to add to your list, Chase? And how about sharing a specific illustration from the video of what you view as an “ineluctable quantum rabbit hole”?
In this video, utter scientific geniuses such Wigner and Einstein are called to the witness stand by William Lane Craig as experts to give testimony to the existence of something beyond the natural (let’s call it “God” for lack of a better term) to explain the remarkable order of the universe.Their testimony is persuasive. Indeed, my grasp of, e.g., the theories of relativity, though tenuous, is much stronger than my understanding of how the aggressive “new atheists” – supposedly intelligent men – could claim to be certain that this order just happens to be. No explanation offered or needed. Nonsense.
But!! No one gets to cross-examine the witnesses. Cross-examination is “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” 3 Wigmore, Evidence §1367, p. 27 (2d ed. 1923). I would ask them only one question on cross: Are any of your discoveries and insights evidence that a rabbi born in the town of Nazareth 200 years ago arose from the dead and ascended into the sky forty days later, therefore demonstrating that he WAS AND IS that God?
Because that’s what Craig is all about. The refutation of atheism is relatively easy. The scientific proof of the tenets of Christianity – not so much. And isn’t that the real “This” in Explain This'”?
You are correct that the video addressed the existence of “some God,” and not “the Christian God.” Both topics are fair game. I don’t see the issue.
The “Christian God” question is a topic for history, not science. The evidence that Jesus’ tomb was empty is exceptionally strong. The disciples proclaimed the resurrection shortly after the crucifixion. Had his body been available, their opponents could have produced it, and that would have been that.
An empty tomb doesn’t prove the resurrection. But no matter how one attempts to explain the tomb, one gets into difficult questions. To sample a few possibilities, could there have been multiple people experiencing consistent, simultaneous hallucinations of a resurrection? There is no evidence that such a thing has ever happened. Then there is the swoon theory–after severely flogging Jesus, crucifying him, and stabbing him with a spear, the soldiers fail to kill him. He revives, moves a heavy stone, and presents himself as risen back to life instead of as someone needing a hospital. Did the disciples steal the body just to make up the resurrection? But why? They certainly didn’t become rich or powerful. They instead put their lives on the line advocating a belief in the resurrection, and none recanted. They also left more than enough testimony to address your cross-examination question with “God did a miracle and Jesus rose from the dead. I saw him with my own eyes.”
As I said, all explanations of the empty tomb get into difficult questions. The question for us is “which of these unlikely explanations is most likely correct?” I go with the “God did a miracle,” but YMMV.
Thanks for the courtesy of your reply. MM does indeed V. The written reports of the stories of his (sorry, His) empty tomb, resurrection, etc, hit the parchment or papyrus about – what? – forty, fifty years after the events they purport to describe? Obviously, Mark, Q, or whoever was not getting the scoop from those who claim they saw an empty tomb – let alone the people who saw the the dearly departed of Jerusalem get up from their graves and walk around like zombies in a John Carpenter movie. It’s all hearsay, and I can’t think of an exception to the hearsay rule that applies. So the evidence is not strong; it’s not even evidence. There was plenty of time for legends to grow – as they often do.
Hey, whatever floats your boat. If you’re confident that you will enjoy an eternal life of bliss because you’ve accepted this eccentric rabbi as your personal savior: great for you. There’s nothing in it for me to convince you that you’re wrong. I hope for your sake that you’re right. But if you want to convince me, you’ll have to do better.
Jim, actually, considering the latest scholarship, it is quite reasonable to conclude witnesses were available and consulted within a few years of the events they described. See this post from earlier this year in which Prof. Gary Habermas goes through the evidence: https://www.hillfaith.org/hillfaith/this-timeline-forever-changed-the-easter-resurrection-debate/
Agreed. When I was coming up (and I’m old–before Habermas’s arguments were available), I was convinced by the “conventional” arguments from the number, dating, and consistency of the manuscripts. But Habermas’ arguments made my jaw drop. I had never dreamed that the empty tomb would be so undeniable.
Let me quibble. The reference cuts the lecture (which I admit is long) before the amazing part. From https://youtu.be/ay_Db4RwZ_M, start at around 30 minutes. From Acts, we know that Paul appeared from the Corinthian leader Gaius around 52AD. Walking back Paul’s chronology from there, we can track Paul’s visit to Jerusalem 14 years earlier, and his conversion 3 years before that. That pushes us back to the mid-30s. So by the mid-30s the followers of Jesus were a problem in Jerusalem, were spreading and becoming a problem elsewhere to the extent that Paul was commissioned to suppress them. This is not years and years later. These are contemporary events.
I am not sure you can have it both ways. Saying that the fact that the universe is understandable is proof of God, while also saying that the things we don’t understand (such as how humanity evolved) is proof of God seems illogical.
Either God created a structured universe that does what he wants without the need of interference or he created a universe where logic and structure are insufficient and miracles and magic are required to explain what we see. It can’t be both.
David, I want to understand what you are saying: Are you saying this is an either/or choice, that there are no other possible alternatives?
I suppose it could theoretically be both in that God could create a semi-structured universe and fiddle with it (i.e. do miracles) to make it come out the way he really wanted but that seems like it would be a very weird choice. What really can’t be both is both being evidence for God. If the structure inherent is in fabric of the universe is miraculous enough to demonstrate that God exists then I can’t see how gaps in our understanding of the structure can also be evidence of God (spots where he had to do miracles.)
Note that I am not talking about miracles such a walking on water which would have a purpose of demonstrating power, but things like life happening, speciation and ultimately intelligence.