God by the Numbers: Coincidence, random mutation not most likely explanations for some things

Christianity Today ^ | 03/10/2006 | Charles Edward White

[Zender500]

Math and theology have had a long and checkered relationship. The Babylonians and Mayans both associated numbers with God. In fact, both societies named their gods with numbers. The Mayans used 13 and the Babylonians used 60. In the Greek world, followers of Pythagoras prayed to the first 4 numbers and thought they were the creator. On the other hand, in the 18th century, the French mathematician Laplace told Napoleon he had no need of God even as a hypothesis, and in 1744, John Wesley confessed: "I am convinced, from many experiments, I could not study either mathematics, arithmetic, or algebra … without being a deist, if not an atheist."

No one knows what Wesley saw in 18th-century mathematics that he feared would lead him away from the God of the Bible, but today, many Christian mathematicians think that numbers point to God. Three numbers in particular suggest evidence for God's existence. They are 1/1010123, 10162, and eði.

Fine-tuning the universe The first recent number that points to God is 1 in 10 to the 10 to the 123. This number comes from astronomy. Oxford professor Roger Penrose discusses it in his book The Large, the Small, and the Human Mind. It derives from a formula by Jacob Beckenstein and Stephen Hawking and describes the chances of our universe being created at random. Penrose spoofs this view by picturing God throwing a dart at all the possible space-time continua and hitting the universe we inhabit. The Beckenstein-Hawking formula is too complicated to discuss here, but another approach to the same problem involves the fine-tuning of the universe and the existence of habitable planets.

The fine-tuning of the universe is shown in the precise strengths of four basic forces. Gravity is the best known of these forces and is the weakest,

[Malesherbes]

Well said.

[Lancey Howard]

WHY are there so many close, bang-bang plays at first base?
Coincidence? I think not.

[guitarist]

Come on, if you changed "anything"--the tilt of the Earth, the speed of its rotation, the distance from the sun, etc.--the planet would've beeen completely sterile. Quite some "conincidence", I'd say...

[tang-soo]

If you wish to learn more about math and God's word, google the name "Ivan Panin". Truly astounding!

[guitarist]

Best selling books saying religous are nutcases: End of Faith by Sam Harris, Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett, current best sellers, just for starters.

Many of current believers in evolution *claim* to be Christians...

[muawiyah]

Hardly ~ we have more biological material living in solid rock than we have living on the surface.

Life is tough. That doesn't mean you and I are, but in general, life can surive all sorts of otherwise apparantly deadly environments. There's even an archeobacter that can rebuild its genome after being irradiated.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Best selling books saying religous are nutcases: End of Faith by Sam Harris, Breaking the Spell by Daniel Dennett, current best sellers, just for starters."

Knowing Dennett's works, and knowing he doesn't think that the religious are nut-cases, I don't take much stock in your claim. Please point out where they say that religious people are nut cases. I want exact quotes, not vague references.

"Many of current believers in evolution *claim* to be Christians..."

Many creationists claim to be Christian too. Most evolutionists ARE Christians.

[billbears]

Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.

"The argument goes something like this: `I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'

"`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'

"`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

"`Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

"Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his best-selling book Well That About Wraps It Up For God.

[Aliska]

I think I'll work out my own theory. That article is too deep for me. Twelve is a good number, 12 tribes, 12 apostles, 12 days of Christmas. Six days of creation. 144,000. The Trinity, 3. Hmmm. All multiples of 3.

Then there is the number 7. God rested on that day. It also happens to be the fourth prime number (had to google that, 1 doesn't count because it's not a multiple of 2 numbers). That's got to be it. Prime numbers. Add them all together, subtract 1, and you've got something, if you can find the last one, but there's always just one more down the line.

Don't ask me what. I'm not done with this yet. They did talk a little about pi, but it has an infinite number of decimal places, just like God who is infinite.

[onedoug]

1+1=2. If 1-1=0, the universe is closed...but for uncertainty.

[DallasMike]

Thanks, that is an excellent article.

Stingray:  Conservative Christian News and Commentary

[TaxRelief]

As most people in the USA who accept evolution are also Christian...

Citations please.

[RunningWolf]

Banjo use of CAPS Fact = NOT

PLACEMARKER

Wolf

[VOA]

bump

[ahayes]

Anthropic principle. The only reason we're here to comment that earth is unusually suited for life is because earth is unusually suited for life.

[ahayes]

If it's true as some have suggested that all possible universes have come into existence, the fact that this one exists is rather yawn-worthy. It's like a one in a million lottery in which all the tickets have been sold. The odds of any particular person winning is one in a million, but the odds of someone winning is one.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

By a 4 to 1 margin, people who accept evolution believe that God directed it (theistic evolution). Since the vast majority of theists in the USA are Christian, it follows that the majority of theistic evolutionists are also Christian (not necessarily in as strong a percentage as the first part).

Results for the 1991-NOV-21 to 24 poll were:

Belief system	Creationist view	Theistic evolution	Naturalistic Evolution
Group of adults	God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, including man's creation.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process.
Everyone	47%	40%	9%
Men	39%	45%	11.5%
Women	53%	36%	6.6%
College graduates	25%	54%	16.5%
No high school diploma	65%	23%	4.6%
Income over $50,000	29%	50%	17%
Income under $20,000	59%	28%	6.5%
Caucasians	46%	40%	9%
African-Americans	53%	41%	4%

1997-NOV data is little changed. Note the massive differences between the beliefs of the general population and of scientists:

Belief system	Creationist view	Theistic evolution	Naturalistic Evolution
Group of adults	God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process, including man's creation.	Man has developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. God had no part in this process.
Everyone	44%	39%	10%
Scientists	5%	40%	55%

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm

[svcw]

Do you have your towel?

[truthfinder9]

Problem with that poll is that it doesn't recgonize that there are different kinds of "creationists." That perception is thanks to the overzealous "young-earth" creationists. There are quite a few "old-earth creationists" who are NOT thiestic evolutionists. In fact, many of the leaders in the design movement are this. But a lot has changed since that poll was taken (1991). Kind of old data to be still throwing it around, don't you think?

Why Young-Earthism is NOT biblical