Embedded Files
https://sites.google.com/site/s2hinrichs/steve-hinrichs-rational-webpage-with-meaningful-purpose (revised 4/2022)
The goal of the Steve Hinrichs web page is to present in an accurate and concise manner the best arguments for and against the claim that ultimately there is a purposeful explanation for the origin of humans. A genuine investigation involves studying the best rational arguments for and against all the different possible explanations. The question about believing in God deserves a fair trial.
Rational Reasoning for Reality explains that proof by elimination is a key logical concept used to rationally determine the truth about reality. This webpage presents Steve Hinrichs' rational evaluation of issues related to this claim along with external links.
It is apparent to me that naturally I have a strong interest in a meaningful explanation for my life. Some critical scientist will claim this is just a personal bias; however, science is supposed to be guided by observation. If there is anything such as an honest observation about the nature of myself, it is that I have an interest in a meaningful explanation for my life.
The natural world cannot on its own provide a purposeful explanation for the origins of humans. Philosopher Hume points this out in his Is–ought problem that fundamentally a moral principal cannot be determined from a physical description of the natural world. Thus, it is natural to investigate if there is evidence for the super natural to see if there is an plan or purpose for the origin of humans. A rational method for such an investigation is proposed in Rational Methodology for Identifying Supernatural Intervention. This approach is conservative and falsifiable. It makes use of the process of elimination to make an argument for the supernatural, so I would think scientist would appreciate it. You can see me debate others about this at reasonable faith discussion or amazon discussion.
Can chance and natural necessity completely explain the origin of life and the universe?
The universe started with a Big Bang and out of it fell quite an array of stars and planets with our Earth just happening to be well suited for life. Does this appeared to be planned or just happened by chance? William Craig explains the Kalam Cosmological argument video that claims God started it (video summary). The initial conditions of the universe and it properties fall in a very narrow range of the possible range that would allow for life. The teleological argument that these finely tunes value were set by a designer are explained by Craig Teleological and Discovery Teleological (video summary).
Some evolutionist claim that their theory along with the impersonal natural laws completely explain the existence of humans. Since evolution theory claims that all new information originated by chance, this claim obviously has great bearing on the questions that I raised at the beginning of this page. The great complexity of life raises the question if it could have all evolved by chance. The scientific community has extensively studied the origin of life issue and most scientist propose that based upon fossils in the geological record all life is related by common ancestors which developed by a process of chance and natural necessity. This proposal is shown on Tree of Life and the arguments for it are very well summarized in Talk.Origins Archive. My articles do not dismiss the concept that there are certain progressions of morphological features in the fossil record that follow a common pattern of development. In addition, life forms share quite a few common characteristics that imply common descent. A good example of this is explained in Compelling Data for Common Descent from Matching Redundant DNA Sequences. These evidences make a solid and strong case that species share common ancestors; however, there are good reasons to think as I do that God must have been involved. Natural selection is completely dependent upon chance or the intervention of intelligence for providing the new life forms on which it acts upon. The following articles claim that just chance cannot completely explain the origination of the information on which these new life forms are based.
In Probability of Abiogenesis the probability of obtaining something like the first cell which is a crucial step in the proposed evolutionary process is investigated. This article describes the great problems of such a life forming out of a primordial soup. Best attempts of evolutionist to explain such a process are also presented so you can see for yourself if such a belief is scientifically justified. Read this article and found out why Frances Crick the Nobel Prize winner and discover of DNA stated, "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle".
Darwin stated in Ref. 2. "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possible been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory (Natural Selection) would absolutely break down." This is appropriate since the step by step sequence guided by natural selection is limited to unplanned mutations and copying errors. Since the scientific process is supposed to be one that focuses on falsification, it is appropriate to investigate features of life to see if they fit the description that Darwin defined. Several features about life are submitted in Design Articles as satisfying Darwin's requirement. They include, the blood clotting system, the immune system, the fabrication of the crucial nucleotide AMP and vision.
Rational evidence for a Super Natural Soul?
Near-death experiences (NDEs) are reported by about 15% of those who nearly die. NDEs have been reported by children, adults, scientists, physicians, priests, ministers, among the religious and atheists, and from countries throughout the world. You can read many actual accounts at the NDERF website. There are a large variety of accounts, but there are some that have some amazing characteristics indicating their soul may have continued to really experience a life after death.
Abstract complex thought is the most amazing things about humans. It is mind boggling to completely explain through just physical explanations. This brain surgeon Dr. Michael Egnor talks about brain experiments where they are able to identify location in the brain where certain functions are done, but they do not seem to have a clue where in the brain abstract thought occurs. Even in some of the most damaged brains there still is full capability for abstract thought. Read about these evidences for the soul in this link.
Rational evidence in Christianity for a Super Natural Origin?
Is there evidence for a God that has left a message that indicates a good purpose for humans? In Section 1 of Apologetics Summary for the Bible I propose certain characteristic to look for in trying to answer this question. In Section 2, I submit evidence from the Bible that I propose indicates that these characteristic can be found in the Bible. Section 3 presents evidence that indicates there is reliable information in the Bible. The Bible does has its difficulties and it is appropriate mention them which I do by reference in Section 4 and briefly deal with some of them. Extensive work has been done by the critics in academia which claim that the Bible was completely fabricated by men. This work is briefly mentioned and dealt with in Section 4.
Naturally, critics often select interpretation of Gospels passages in a way that maximizes alleged contradictions. The process of maximizing alleged contradictions is the business of salesmen, not scientist. The way to definitely determine contradictions is to first investigate if there are plausible interpretations or possibilities that do not imply contradictions. If there are no plausible interpretations or possibilities with no contradiction, then there is a valid argument that there really is a contradiction. I do not claim there are no valid arguments for contradictions in the Bible. The Bible should be investigated for definite contradictions rather than a process of maximizing alleged contradictions.
There are different approaches promoted by theist and atheist that allow them to maintain their position regardless of the evidence so they are invincible to evidence that imply their position false. Scientist would not promote arguments that are invincible to the evidence whether it is for maintaining a certain form of Theism or NonTheism. The articles on this website do not use arguments that are invincible to the evidence.
Messianic prophesies are an important issue concerning the claim that Jesus was the divine Messiah. The most remarkable one is found in Daniel 9:25. Even the critics admit that this the passage is the most convincing prophecy for Christians that Jesus was the divine Messiah. However, the critics claim it is full of problems. You can read it and see for yourself which is the case. Daniel's Messiah in the Critics Den explains the prophecy and list the criticisms of the prophecy along with rebuttals. You can see me debate others about this at amazon discussion.
The apostle Paul states in I Cor. 15:14 "And if Christ be not risen, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith is also in vain." Unlike most religions, Christianity hinges on a proposed historical event. That Jesus died for the sinner, defeated the consequence of sin (physical and spiritual death for humans) and proved it by bodily rising again. Naturally, the critics dismiss the resurrection accounts by claiming that they were fabricated by the early Christian Church. They attempt to support this view by claiming that the five different resurrection accounts are so contradictory that is impossible to resolve them in a reasonable manner. Is this the case? Well, in Resurrection Puzzle is a reconstruction of the resurrection that is proposed as consistent with the five different accounts. The five different accounts are listed in parallel according to the proposed reconstruction so that the reader can see for themselves if the reconstruction is consistent with these accounts. Also, are listed are the 19 alleged contradictions made by the critics along with rebuttals so that the reader can determine for themselves if these accounts are contradictory.
William Lane Craig lists several facts that support the ressurection of Jesus.
Another interesting point of the resurrection account is The Gospel of Matthew mentions the roman soldiers guarding the tomb of Jesus had to make up an alibi to explain the empty tomb. There are certain features about this story that do not fit well with this being just a legend. These are explained in the testimony of hostile witnesses concerning the resurrection. By the way the Tabloid story of Jesus being buried in the Talpoit Tomb is not true.
Conclusion
Converge presents a summary of the rational evidence that there is a God with a purpose and plan for humans. If God exists and created the universe, He certainly could make stronger evidence for God more evident here on Earth, but it may be that God did not intend to make Heaven something so obviously true as that would significantly change the environment and motivation for people making choices here on Earth. Perhaps prior to the afterlife, God has a purpose in people experiencing what life is like where the conscious, free will and impersonal random nature dominate people so people see what it is like when their consequences are in full effect.
Why would God allow undeserved pain and suffering?
There is extensive undeserved pain and suffering through no fault of any person such as children born with a defect or random events in nature such as lighting strikes. So critics such as Sam Harris will claim there can be no benevolent God because such a God would never allow for this. However, this can be explained by a God with a good purpose who makes things right in Heaven at the end. It could be that prior to humans going to heaven, God wants humans to fully experience a world where God or good purpose does not control everything in this natural world. Also, it could be that God did not want the evidence to be too compelling in this natural word that there is a God that has a heaven prepared for us. Lightning never striking any human or no humans every drowning in a flood is so improbable that it would be compelling that God is controlling nature so such things do not happen. If God and heaven was so obvious it would be like people on Earth directly seeing this heaven where all is perfect forever. This would really change most all people’s way thinking of why stay on the earth, I can just die now and go to this heaven I see right next door. That is not that kind of environment that God may want people to experience here on Earth. It could be that God wants people to fully experience prior to Heaven what a world is like without God controlling things to make them perfect.
Is religion a good influence in the world?
Throughout history great good and bad has been done in the name of religion. Religion trying to control people through government has many times corrupted religion because the power driven people become the religious leaders and tried to coerce people to follow a religious position to maintain their power. This is a good reason for separation of church and state; however, both religious and not religious people should take part in democracy and vote to protect human rights. It is the moral not power driven people that want to respect God and people that should become the religious leaders. Two good speakers Tony Blair a religious person and Christopher Hitchens debate both sides of this issue in a 30 minute video.
Tony is right to make the point there are many great examples of how religion inspired people to be good. A good God who has communicated a good message with good purpose is indeed a good inspiration for good purpose. For example, in the gospel parable of the good Samaritan one finds God telling us we should care for anyone who needs our help for survival. Comparing DNA from different species no doubt shows they share common species, however, how these DNA difference naturally came about are purely random impersonal processes with the only driving force behind them is the survival of the fittest. Observing this one will not find any reason to care for somebody else other than those their survival of their genes do depend upon. Christopher is right that people without religion do develop strong convictions to be good and there are plenty of good examples of this. However, philosopher Hume points out in his Is–ought problem that fundamentally a moral principal cannot be rationally determined from a physical description of the natural world.
Healthy religious belief occurs when the person freely chooses to believe in the religion for good reasons not just from some fear of hell or to satisfy those in their community. A man who chooses to follow religion based just on commitment to a god rather than some good moral principal within the religion and good reasoning for belief in the religion can be a dangerous man. If his identity is all wrapped in this religion without a good grounding in morals and he feels something is against his religion, then he feels may personally under attack which could lead him to attack back in way that is not constrained by morals.
Send any question to s2hinrichs@gmail.com.
References for Steve Hinrichs Homepage
1. Hauer, Young, An Introduction to the Bible, Prentice Hall, 1986
2. Darwin, C., Origin of Species
External Links
Debates
Debates are good because fallacious claims can be quickly exposed and one can see in a condensed format the key arguments from both sides along with rebuttals. William Craig is one the best debater for the existence of God. At his web site, Reasonable Faith are listed many debates. Also, you can watch his UTube God Existence Debates where Craig and others argues for a creator who initiated the beginning of the universe and fine-tuned it for life. In the UTube Jesus Resurrection Debates Craig and others argues there is evidence which supports the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
Evolution
The scientific community has extensively studied the origin of life issue and most scientist propose that based upon fossils in the geological record all life is related by common ancestors which developed by a process of chance and natural necessity. This proposal is shown on Tree of Life and the arguments for it are very well summarized in Talk.Origins Archive. Other good links can be found through Talk.Origins Counterpoints.
Atheism
The arguments against my claims concerning Christianity are very well summarized in The Secular Web. These folks think that you, I, themselves and any religion are ultimately explained by just chance and natural necessity. They also provide many links.
Christianity
These folks believe that themselves and Christianity cannot be completely explained by just chance and natural necessity Michael Strauss, Aron Wall, Craig's Historical Jesus, Gary Habermas Website, Gary Habermas Links. They also provide many links.
Creation
These folks claim that life cannot be completely explained by just chance and natural necessity. Access Research Network and Reasons to Believe.
Mixed
Professors at Cal State Fullerton that offer a class on discussing these issues have set up a web page with many links from a variety of different positions.
I believe the earth is old and different species share a common ancestor because there is geological and astronomical data that the young earth view cannot explain, but is explained by the old earth view and there is strong evidence as mentioned previously that different species share a common ancestor. This is similar to the view of Francis Collins a Christian and director of National Institute and Health. He started the Biologos group which supports Christian faith within the constraints of science. Leading Christian Apologist William Craig position is that theistic evolution is an plausible interpretation of Genesis 1.
The internet is an excellent source for investigating and discussing the success of different theories which attempt to completely explain the origins of life and religion.
Visited
times since 2006.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse