Canadian pro-lifers to begin “The New Abortion Caravan” on May 29

Finally, someone revealed to me what the secret pro-life project is all about. It’s a project of Canadian pro-lifers. They are planning a pro-life speaking and debating tour of Canada starting on the west coast in Vancouver and ending at the capital city of Ottawa.

Basically, they are retracing the steps of a group of pro-abortion activists who traveled that same route in 1970 while trying to shift public opinion towards legalized abortion. Eighteen years after “The Abortion Caravan” completed their journey, abortion was made legal in Canada, through all nine months of pregnancy, and full funded by taxpayers – even pro-life taxpayers. Three million unborn children were killed after the law was changed. Additionally, pro-life doctors and nurses have been forced to perform abortions against their consciences – or lose their jobs.

Here’s what the pro-lifers intend to do:

On May 29, a team of young people who are survivors—all born at a time when their peers were being killed—will be re-tracing the steps of the 1970 Caravan. This New Abortion Caravan will also use vivid imagery. However, instead of focusing on a woman’s “choice,” this team from the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) will use abortion imagery to force the Canadian public to consider what is being chosen.

The pre-born are Canada’s invisible children. It is time to make them, and their plight, visible to a public largely unaware of their fate.

The New Abortion Caravan will do that in such a way that in every community the Caravan passes through, the public will be confronted by the reality of “choice.”

They then describe some of the things they intend to do, with pictures.

And more:

In each city, the media will inevitably be compelled to cover the abortion issue once again as the New Abortion Caravan passes through. The presence of the dismembered pre-born victims will force Canadians and the media to recognize their plight. The historical resonance of the New Abortion Caravan confronting the injustices brought about by the original Abortion Caravan will force people to re-examine their conceptions about abortion.

[...]Besides its visual outreach, The New Abortion Caravan will stop in towns and cities and hold presentations and debates about abortion to answer the questions of the public and educate Canadians on this life and death issue.

After crossing the country to Toronto, the New Abortion Caravan will end in Ottawa, where politicians and the public will be forced to face the shattered bodies of Canadian children they have failed so badly.

Here’s an example of one of the events they have planned:

Date: June 6, 2012

Time: 7:30pm – 9:15pm

Speakers:

• Stephanie Gray
• Howard Nye

Event: Abortion Debate

Location: Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, 2nd floor, Room 90 11405 87th Ave, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Click here to read more, but be on the alert for graphic images of aborted children.

Filed under: Events, Canada, Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, CCBR, Debate, Jose Ruba, Lecture, Ottawa, Right to Life, Schedule, Stephanie Gray, The Abortion Caravan, The New Abortion Caravan, Unborn, Vancouver

William Lane Craig debates Lawrence Krauss: Does God Exist?

Audio of the William Lane Craig vs. Lawrence Krauss debate at North Carolina State University has now been posted at Apologetics 315.

And I also posted some background information on Craig’s arguments.

William Lane Craig’s case

William Lane Craig made 5 arguments for the existence of God:

• the contingency argument
• theargument from the origin of the universe (kalam)
• the argument from cosmic fine-tuning
• the moral argument
• the argument from the miracle of the resurrection

These arguments went unrefuted during the debate.

Lawrence Krauss’s case

Lawrence Krauss made the following arguments in his first speech:

• Dr. Craig is a professional debater
• Dr. Craig is not a scientist
• Dr. Craig is a philosopher
• Disproving God’s is a waste of my valuable time
• Dr. Craig has the burden of proof to show evidence
• My job is not to present any evidence
• I think that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is a nice slogan, but I have no evidence for it
• I don’t like that God doesn’t appear on Youtube, therefore he doesn’t exist
• I don’t like that God didn’t appear to humans until recently, therefore he doesn’t exist
• I don’t like that the stars didn’t come together to spell “I am here”, therefore God doesn’t exist
• Dr. Craig has to supply extraordinary evidence, because my favorite slogan says he has to
• Dr. Craig talks about logic, but the universe is not logical
• Dr. Craig doesn’t have any arguments, just things he doesn’t like
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like infinity, and that’s why he believes in the Big Bang cosmology
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like chance, and that’s why he believes in cosmic fine-tuning
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like rape, and that’s why he believes in the ontological foundations of morality
• If people believe in logic, then they can’t do science
• The things that science discovers contradict the laws of logic
• For example, Dr. Craig doesn’t like infinity, so he believes in the experimental measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation
• For example, Dr. Craig doesn’t like chance, so he believes in the fine-tuning of the gravitational constant for the formation of stable stars
• Quantum mechanics shows that the universe is stranger than you think, therefore all of Craig’s arguments are false
• My t-shirt says 2 + 2 = 5, therefore all of Craig’s arguments are false
• Atheism may look ridiculous, but it’s true, and if you don’t like it, too bad – because the universe is very strange
• Accidents happen all the time, so that explains the cosmic fine-tuning
• We all have to convince ourselves of 10 impossible things before breakfast, and atheism is impossible, so you need to convince yourself of it
• I don’t know about the Big Bang, so Dr. Craig cannot use the Big Bang to to prove the universe began to exist
• I don’t know about the cosmic fine-tuning, so Dr. Craig cannot use the fine-tuning of cosmological constants to prove the fine-tuning
• I don’t know anything about science, so Dr. Craig cannot use science in his arguments
• Dr. Craig says that the universe is contingent because it began to exist 13.7 billion years ago based on the state-of-the-art scientific evidence for the Big Bang creation out of nothing from 1) red-shift of light from distant galaxies, 2) cosmic microwave background radiation, 3) helium-hydrogen abundances, 4) experimental confirmation of general relativity, 5) the second law of thermodynamics, 6) radioactive element abundances, etc., but how does he know that? I don’t know that
• It’s fine not to know the answer to scientific questions like whether the universe began to exist, it’s more exciting
• Thinking that the universe began to exist based on 6 pieces of scientific evidence is the “God-of-the-Gaps” fallacy, it’s intellectual laziness
• But all kidding aside, the universe actually did begin to exist 13.72 billion years ago, exactly like Craig says in his argument
• I could argue that God created the universe 4.5 seconds ago with all of us sitting believing that we heard Dr. Craig, and how could you prove me wrong? It’s not falsifiable
• Universes can spontaneously appear out of nothing, and in fact they have to appear out of nothing
• Nothing is unstable, and space and time can come into existence out of nothing, so that’s not a problem
• Our universe could have appeared out of a multiverse, an unobservable, untestable multiverse that I have no way of observing or testing
• The universe is not fine-tuned for life, and no scientist says so, especially not Martin Rees, the atheist Astronomer Royal, and every other scientist
• What if God decided that rape was OK, would it be OK? God can change his moral nature arbitrarily, can’t he?

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ second speech:

• We don’t understand the beginning of the universe
• We don’t understand whether the universe had a cause
• Steven Weinberg says that science makes it possible to be an atheist, so therefore the universe didn’t begin and didn’t have a cause
• It’s just intellectual laziness to say that the universe came into being 13.7 billion years ago, and that things that come into being of nothing have a cause
• Dr. Craig is an expert on nothing, ha ha ha!
• There are multiple versions of nothing, there’s nothing, and then there is something, which is also nothing if I want it to be
• There was no space, there was no time, and then the space create the empty space
• I’m going to give Dr. Craig a break
• At least in the nothing there were laws like F=ma, and those laws created the empty space, because descriptions of matter that does not even exist yet can create space out of nothing
• Alan Guth and Alexander Vilenkin are good friends of mine and I talk to them all the time, unlike Dr. Craig
• Alan Guth and Alexander Vilenkin don’t mention God in their scientific papers, therefore the universe didn’t begin and didn’t have a cause
• Maybe there is a multiverse that cannot be observed or tested? And my unscientific speculations are a refutation of Craig’s scientific evidence for the fine-tuning
• Dr. Craig just doesn’t like my speculations about the unobservable, untestable multiverse, and that’s why he believes in the Big Bang cosmology
• And if you let me speculate about an unobservable, untestable multiverse, then maybe the inanimate invisible universes reproduce and compete for food and mutate like animals and then there is natural selection so that the finely-tuned universes survive and now we’re in one!
• My cool animation of blue goo mutating proves that the multiverse is real! Empty space is not empty!
• Darwinism, which is a theory about the origin of species, explains the cosmic fine-tuning that occurred at the moment of creation
• The unobservable, untestable multiverse universes all have different laws, I believe
• We don’t know what the right answer is, but we are willing to look at any possibility, as long as the possibilities we look at are not supernatural possibilities
• The discovery of the origin of the universe could be an accident, I don’t know if the universe began to exist or not, maybe all the six scientific evidences are wrong because if I don’t like the evidence we have, so I’ll just wait for new evidence to overturn the evidence we have which I don’t like
• Maybe there are other forms of life that are unobservable and untestable that are compatible with a universe that has no stable stars, no planets, no elements heavier than hydrogen, no hydrogen, no carbon, etc.

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ third speech:

• Dr. Craig is stupid
• Why should we even care about Dr. Craig’s arguments and evidence, we can just count the number of scientists who are atheists and decide whether God exists that way – I decided everything based on what my teachers told me to believe
• I actually know general relativity, not like Dr. Craig who co-wrote a book on general relativity published by Oxford University Press
• What quantum mechanics shows is that virtual particles come into being in a quantum vacuum, and then go out of existence almost immediately – and that is exactly like how a 13.7 billion year old universe came into being in a quantum vacuum, and we’re going to disappear very soon
• Space and the laws of physics can be created, possibly, if you accept my speculations about an unobservable, untestable multiverse
• I don’t like the God of the Old Testament, therefore he doesn’t exist
• Groups of people can decide what they think is good and evil, like the Nazis and slave-owners did, and then that becomes good for them in that time and place, and that’s what I mean by morality
• Here’s something I studied that wasn’t fine-tuned, therefore there is no fine-tuning of the universe
• Not knowing things is really exciting! Dr. Craig is not really exciting because he knows things – phooey!

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ fourth speech:

• If you will just grant me an observable, untestable multiverse, then there must be some universe where intelligent life exists
• Infinite numbers of things exist everywhere in nature, you can see lots of infinite collections of things, like jelly beans and bumblebees and invisible pink unicorns
• I don’t like the fine-tuning, but if my speculations about the multiverse are proven true, then I won’t have to learn to live with the fine-tuning
• Inflation, the rapid expansion of the universe which occurs at some time after the the origin of the universe (t = 0), explains the absolute origin of time, space, matter and energy out of nothing that occurred at t = 0
• Physical processes that develop subsequent to the creation of the universe at t > 0 can explain the fine-tuning of quantities that are set at t = 0
• Morality is just a bunch of arbitrary conventions decided by groups of people in different times and places by an accidental process of biological and social evolution, but that practice over there by those people is objectively wrong!
• 1 Cor 15:3-7, which most scholars, even atheists like James Crossley, admit is dated to within 3 years of the death of Jesus, is actually dated to 50 years after the death of Jesus
• The historical case for the resurrection made by people like N.T. Wright in their multi-volume academic works is on par with the story of Mohammed ascending to Heaven on a horse

If you liked this, please check out my snarky summary of Christopher Hitchens’ speeches in the Craig-Hitchens debate.

Filed under: Events, 2011, Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, Andre Linde, Audio, Big Bang, Cosmology, Debate, Energy, Ethics, Evidence, Fine Tuning, God, Inflation, Lawrence Krauss, March, March 30, Matter, Moral Argument, Morality, Multiverse, North Carolina, North Carolina State University, Origin, Physics, Religion, Science, Scientism, Space, Theory, Time, Video, Village Atheist, William Lane Craig

Upcoming summer apologetics conference in Phoenix, Arizona

Here is an apologetics conference that is happening in Phoenix, Arizona in June!

And here are the speakers:

• Mary Jo Sharp (Confident Christianity)
• Brett Kunkle (Stand to Reason)
• Neil Mammen
• Letitia Wong
• Shawn White

And here are the topics:

• What is truth?
• Are all religions the same?
• Does God exist?
• Is the Bible true?
• Is faith blind?

And they are having a raffle for an Ipad 2 for conference sponsors! If you are looking for a good conference to sponsor, this one looks ideal!

Filed under: Events, Apologetics, Apologetics Conference, Arizona, Christian Apologetics, Conference, Learn, Learning, Phoenix, Smart Faith, Training

Audio and video from the debate between William Lane Craig and Lawrence Krauss

Audio of the William Lane Craig vs. Lawrence Krauss debate at North Carolina State University has now been posted at Apologetics 315.

And I also posted some background information on Craig’s arguments.

William Lane Craig’s case

William Lane Craig made 5 arguments for the existence of God:

• the contingency argument
• theargument from the origin of the universe (kalam)
• the argument from cosmic fine-tuning
• the moral argument
• the argument from the miracle of the resurrection

These arguments went unrefuted during the debate.

Lawrence Krauss’s case

Lawrence Krauss made the following arguments in his first speech

• Dr. Craig is a professional debater
• Dr. Craig is not a scientist
• Dr. Craig is a philosopher
• Disproving God’s is a waste of my valuable time
• Dr. Craig has the burden of proof to show evidence
• My job is not to present any evidence
• I think that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” is a nice slogan, but I have no evidence for it
• I don’t like that God doesn’t appear on Youtube, therefore he doesn’t exist
• I don’t like that God didn’t appear to humans until recently, therefore he doesn’t exist
• I don’t like that the stars didn’t come together to spell “I am here”, therefore God doesn’t exist
• Dr. Craig has to supply extraordinary evidence, because my favorite slogan says he has to
• Dr. Craig talks about logic, but the universe is not logical
• Dr. Craig doesn’t have any arguments, just things he doesn’t like
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like infinity, and that’s why he believes in the Big Bang cosmology
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like chance, and that’s why he believes in cosmic fine-tuning
• Dr. Craig doesn’t like rape, and that’s why he believes in the ontological foundations of morality
• If people believe in logic, then they can’t do science
• The things that science discovers contradict the laws of logic
• For example, Dr. Craig doesn’t like infinity, so he believes in the experimental measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation
• For example, Dr. Craig doesn’t like chance, so he believes in the fine-tuning of the gravitational constant for the formation of stable stars
• Quantum mechanics shows that the universe is stranger than you think, therefore all of Craig’s arguments are false
• My t-shirt says 2 + 2 = 5, therefore all of Craig’s arguments are false
• Atheism may look ridiculous, but it’s true, and if you don’t like it, too bad – because the universe is very strange
• Accidents happen all the time, so that explains the cosmic fine-tuning
• We all have to convince ourselves of 10 impossible things before breakfast, and atheism is impossible, so you need to convince yourself of it
• I don’t know about the Big Bang, so Dr. Craig cannot use the Big Bang to to prove the universe began to exist
• I don’t know about the cosmic fine-tuning, so Dr. Craig cannot use the fine-tuning of cosmological constants to prove the fine-tuning
• I don’t know anything about science, so Dr. Craig cannot use science in his arguments
• Dr. Craig says that the universe is contingent because it began to exist 13.7 billion years ago based on the state-of-the-art scientific evidence for the Big Bang creation out of nothing from 1) red-shift of light from distant galaxies, 2) cosmic microwave background radiation, 3) helium-hydrogen abundances, 4) experimental confirmation of general relativity, 5) the second law of thermodynamics, 6) radioactive element abundances, etc., but how does he know that? I don’t know that
• It’s fine not to know the answer to scientific questions like whether the universe began to exist, it’s more exciting
• Thinking that the universe began to exist based on 6 pieces of scientific evidence is the “God-of-the-Gaps” fallacy, it’s intellectual laziness
• But all kidding aside, the universe actually did begin to exist 13.72 billion years ago, exactly like Craig says in his argument
• I could argue that God created the universe 4.5 seconds ago with all of us sitting believing that we heard Dr. Craig, and how could you prove me wrong? It’s not falsifiable
• Universes can spontaneously appear out of nothing, and in fact they have to appear out of nothing
• Nothing is unstable, and space and time can come into existence out of nothing, so that’s not a problem
• Our universe could have appeared out of a multiverse, an unobservable, untestable multiverse that I have no way of observing or testing, but which was in fact created by none other than the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
• The universe is not fine-tuned for life, and no scientist says so, especially Martin Rees, the atheist Astronomer Royal, and every other scientist
• What if God decided that rape was OK, would it be OK? God can change his moral nature arbitrarily, can’t he?
• Would you have any preference as to whether I was born an atheist baby or a Muslim baby?

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ second speech:

• We don’t understand the beginning of the universe
• We don’t understand whether the universe had a cause
• Steven Weinberg says that science makes it possible to be an atheist, so therefore the universe didn’t begin and didn’t have a cause
• It’s just intellectual laziness to say that the universe came into being 13.7 billion years ago, and that things that come into being of nothing have a cause
• Dr. Craig is an expert on nothing, ha ha ha!
• There are multiple versions of nothing, there’s nothing, and then there is something, which is also nothing if I want it to be
• There was no space, there was no time, and then the space create the empty space
• I’m going to give Dr. Craig a break
• At least in the nothing there were laws like F=ma, and those laws created the empty space, because descriptions of matter that does not even exist yet can create space out of nothing
• Alan Guth and Alexander Vilenkin are good friends of mine and I talk to them all the time, unlike Dr. Craig
• Alan Guth and Alexander Vilenkin don’t mention God in their scientific papers, therefore the universe didn’t begin and didn’t have a cause
• Maybe there is a multiverse that cannot be observed or tested? And my unscientific speculations are a refutation of Craig’s scientific evidence for the fine-tuning
• Dr. Craig just doesn’t like my speculations about the unobservable, untestable multiverse, and that’s why he believes in the Big Bang cosmology
• And if you let me speculate about an unobservable, untestable multiverse, then maybe the inanimate invisible universes reproduce and compete for food and mutate like animals and then there is natural selection so that the finely-tuned universes survive and now we’re in one!
• My cool animation of blue goo mutating proves that the multiverse is real! Empty space is not empty!
• Darwinism, which is a theory about the origin of species, explains the cosmic fine-tuning that occurred at the moment of creation
• The unobservable, untestable multiverse universes all have different laws, I believe
• We don’t know what the right answer is, but we are willing to look at any possibility, as long as the possibilities we look at are not supernatural possibilities, because I am not giving up my right to recreational sex outside of marriage!
• The discovery of the origin of the universe could be an accident, I don’t know if the universe began to exist or not, maybe all the six scientific evidences are wrong because if I don’t like the evidence we have, so I’ll just wait for new evidence to overturn the evidence we have which I don’t like
• Maybe there are other forms of life that are unobservable and untestable that are compatible with a universe that has no stable stars, no planets, no elements heavier than hydrogen, no hydrogen, no carbon, etc.

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ third speech:

• Dr. Craig is stupid
• Why should we even care about Dr. Craig’s arguments and evidence, we can just count the number of scientists who are atheists and decide whether God exists that way – I decided everything based on what my teachers told me to believe – I needed good grades to make money so I could move out of my bossy parents’ house and have fun!
• I actually know general relativity, not like Dr. Craig who co-wrote a book on general relativity published by Oxford University Press
• What quantum mechanics shows is that virtual particles come into being in a quantum vacuum, and then go out of existence almost immediately – and that is exactly like how a 13.7 billion year old universe came into being in a quantum vacuum, and we’re going to disappear very soon
• Space and the laws of physics can be created, possibly, if you accept my speculations about an unobservable, untestable multiverse
• I don’t like the God of the Old Testament, especially his prohibition on drunkenness and fornication, therefore he doesn’t exist
• Groups of people can decide what they think is good and evil, like the Nazis and slave-owners did, and then that becomes good for them in that time and place, and that’s what I mean by morality
• Here’s something I studied that wasn’t fine-tuned, therefore there is no fine-tuning of the universe
• Not knowing things is really exciting! Dr. Craig is not really exciting because he knows things – phooey!

Here are the arguments in Krauss’ fourth speech:

• If you will just grant me an observable, untestable multiverse, then there must be some universe where intelligent life exists
• Infinite numbers of things exist everywhere in nature, you can see lots of infinite collections of things, like jelly beans and bumblebees and invisible pink unicorns
• I don’t like the fine-tuning, but if my speculations about the multiverse are proven true, then I won’t have to learn to live with the fine-tuning
• Inflation, the rapid expansion of the universe which occurs at some time after the the origin of the universe (t = 0), explains the absolute origin of time, space, matter and energy out of nothing that occurred at t = 0
• Physical processes that develop subsequent to the creation of the universe at t > 0 can explain the fine-tuning of quantities that are set at t = 0
• Morality is just a bunch of arbitrary conventions decided by groups of people in different times and places by an accidental process of biological and social evolution, but that practice over there by those people is objectively wrong!
• 1 Cor 15:3-7, which most scholars, even atheists like James Crossley, admit is dated to within 3 years of the death of Jesus, is actually dated to 50 years after the death of Jesus
• The historical case for the resurrection made by people like N.T. Wright in their multi-volume academic works is on par with the story of Mohammed ascending to Heaven on a horse

If you liked this, please check out my snarky summary of Christopher Hitchens’ speeches in the Craig-Hitchens debate.

Filed under: Events, 2011, Alan Guth, Alexander Vilenkin, Andre Linde, Audio, Big Bang, Cosmology, Debate, Energy, Ethics, Evidence, Fine Tuning, God, Inflation, Lawrence Krauss, March, March 30, Matter, Moral Argument, Morality, Multiverse, North Carolina, North Carolina State University, Origin, Physics, Religion, Science, Scientism, Space, Theory, Time, Video, Village Atheist, William Lane Craig

Preview of the William Lane Craig vs Lawrence Krauss debate

UPDATE: I have now posted a preview of the William Lane Craig vs. Sam Harris debate!

UPDATE: The video and audio from the Krauss-Craig debate are linked in this post.

I’ve put together some relevant resources to prepare you for tonight’s BIG debate (and to get tweeted by Brian Auten of Apologetics 315, I hope!)

The Big Bang and the Fine-Tuning

First, since Lawrence Krauss is a physicist, I expect that there will be some disagreement about the the kalam cosmological argument and the cosmic fine-tuning argument. To prepare yourself for the cosmological argument, you should print out this peer-reviewed article written by Craig. To prepare yourself for the fine-tuning argument, you should read this paper by Robin Collins.

And then you can watch this 10-part lecture delivered by William Lane Craig at the University of Colorado, Boulder. It is entitled “Beyond the Big Bang”.

Beyond the Big Bang

Here’s part 1:

The full playlist is here.

If you watch the full lecture, you’ll notice that Craig takes a question from famous atheist Victor Stenger. Stenger is a physicist whom Craig had debated before the lecture on the existence of God at the University of Hawaii. You can watch their entire debate on Youtube, and I’ve linked it below.

William Lane Craig vs. Victor Stenger

Here’s part 1:

The full playlist is here.

Keep in mind that Craig recently debated arch-naturalist Francisco Ayala (link goes to Youtube playlist), so he will be fully prepared to debate philosophy of science, should that come up. I don’t recommend watching the entire debate, because Ayala is difficult to understand.

The moral argument

The owner of the Persistent Questions Exchange blog informed me that Krauss has actually spoken out on morality and science in the past, so we may see some sparks flying on the moral argument. It may therefore be worthwhile for you to review Craig’s recent comments on Sam Harris’ theory on scientific foundations for morality. I think that Krauss may say something similar. (Also note that Harris will be debating Craig on April 7, 2011 at the University of Notre Dame).

You should either read Craig’s paper on the moral argument OR watch a lecture he recently delivered at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Here’s part 1:

The full playlist is here.

If you want to see the moral argument played out in a couple of debates, you could watch the William Lane Craig vs. Paul Kurtz debate on Youtube. Yes, that’s the same Paul Kurtz who wrote the “Humanist Manifesto”. Or you could watch the more recent William Lane Craig vs. Louise Anthony debate on Youtube, if you’ve already seen the Kurtz debate.

So, I think that’s where the clash is going to be tonight – on those three arguments.

Extra credit

Brian Auten maintains the William Lane Craig Audio Debate Feed here, in case you get through all of these and would like to see how well Bill Craig performs against other famous challengers, like Marcus Borg, Lewis Wolpert, Arif Ahmed, Bart Ehman, John Shelby Spong, Gerd Ludemann, John Dominic Crossan, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, etc.

Filed under: Events, Agnosticism, Argument, Atheism, Audio, Chaotic Inflationary, Debate, Ethics, Evidence, Faith, Family Law, Fine Tuning, General Relativity, God, Gravity, Inflation, Kalam, Lecture, Materialism, Moral, Moral Argument, Morality, Multiverse, Naturalism, Non Belief, Obejctive Morality, Philosohy of Science, Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion, Quantum Gravity, Science, Theism, Transcript, Unbelief, Universe, Vacuum Fluctuation, Video, William Lane Craig

Intelligent Design conference in Oklahoma, March 25-26

Structure of DNA

Information here at Evolution News. (H/T Apologetics 315)

Excerpt:

During the past decade, an increasing number of so-called “new atheists” have argued that human beings and the rest of nature are the products of chance and necessity rather than intelligent design. These “new atheists” typically base their ideas on Darwinian evolution, arguing that Darwin proved that nature is the product of a blind and unguided evolutionary process.

The message of the new atheists has spread far and wide. Just two years ago, thousands of students flocked to a lecture by leading new atheist Richard Dawkins at the University of Oklahoma. Dawkins famously contends that “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” He received cheers and applause from the audience at OU.

The Darwinian view of nature has had a powerful impact on nearly every area of our culture. In public policy, it has encouraged the devaluation of human life. Among Christians, it has led some leading theologians and scientists to argue that God Himself doesn’t know how the history of life will turn out. And in science, Darwinian theory has encouraged the censorship of new scientific data as well as discrimination against scientists and students who think nature supplies evidence of intelligent design.

The good news is that the new atheists are wrong. Far from establishing a blind and purposeless universe, the findings of science increasingly provide powerful evidence that we live in a purpose-driven universe of incredible beauty and design.

On March 25-26 Oklahomans will have the chance to explore this evidence for themselves as four national experts come to Oklahoma to address the growing intersection between science and faith. Dr. Michael Behe, renowned biochemist and author of the books Darwin’s Black Box and The Edge of Evolution, will speak about the incredible design in the nanotechnology of the cell. Dr. Jay Richards, co-author of The Privileged Planet, will talk about how earth itself was intelligently designed for life and for scientific discovery. Dr. John West, author of Darwin Day in America and co-editor of The C.S. Lewis Readers’ Encyclopedia, will document the widespread impact of Darwin’s theory on society and faith. And lawyer Casey Luskin, co-author of Traipsing into Evolution: Intelligent Design and the Kitzmiller v. Dover Decision will outline positive steps you can take to stand for truth for you and your family.

Visit the event page here for more details.

If you don’t usually read Apologetics 315, you really need to check out the Friday round-up of all the week’s news.

Other conferences

• Coquitlam, British Columbia
• Cape Town, South Africa

Filed under: Events, Casey Luskin, Charles Darwin, Darwin, Darwinism, Discovery Institute, Education, Evolution, ID, ID Theory, Intelligent Design, Jay Richards, John West, Michael Behe, Oklahoma, School, Student, Teacher

Upcoming debate between William Dembski and Christopher Hitchens

Upcoming debate between William Dembski and Christopher Hitchens. (H/T Apologetics 315)

Details:

William Dembski will be debating Christopher Hitchens at the Prestonwood Baptist Church in Plano, TX, Nov. 18th, on the question of God’s goodness.

“Does a Good God Exist?”

Debate between Dr. William Dembski and Christopher Hitchens

Two intellectual heavy weights will square off toe-to-toe on the existence and goodness of God.

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, where Dr. Dembski is a research professor, has an article on the debate.

Dembski and Hitchens will debate the existence of a good God during a conference for the Biblical Worldview Institute at Prestonwood Christian Academy in Plano, Texas. The debate will be hosted in the worship center at Prestonwood Baptist Church from 8:40 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. It will also be webcast on www.pcawebcast.com.

Dembski, a champion of the Intelligent Design movement, is also a senior fellow with the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture and an author of numerous books, including The Design of Life: Discovering Signs of Intelligence in Biological Systems and The End of Christianity: Finding a Good God in an Evil World. He was also featured in the 2008 documentary on Intelligent Design, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

Hitchens has authored, along with other controversial books, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, and he edited The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Non-Believer. Alongside Sam Harris, Daniel C. Dennett and Richard Dawkins, Hitchens has been called one of “The Four Horsemen” of the atheism. A former atheist, Hitchens’ brother, Peter, renounced his disbelief and recently wrote the 2010 publication, The Rage against God: How Atheism Led me to Faith.

Prestonwood Christian Academy is a ministry of Prestonwood Baptist Church, the location of one of Southwestern Seminary’s seven extension centers. The College at Southwestern is also a sponsor for the debate. For more information on the conference or to register, visit www.prestonwoodchristian.org.

I am a big fan of William Dembski. He will crush Hitchens, just like Craig did at Biola in 2009.

Dallas/Fort-Worth apologetics conference TODAY

Here’s a quick reminder about the upcoming conference in Dallas, TX.

When:

• November 5th and 6th, 2010
• Friday: 7:00 PM to 9:30 PM
• Saturday: 8:30 AM to 4:00 PM

Where:

• Denton Bible Church

Speakers and topics:

• Tag-team of all speakers on apologetics
• Dr. Paul Nelson, “The Power and Promise of Intelligent Design in Biology”
• Dr. Craig Hazen, “Did Jesus Really Rise from the Dead?”
• Sean McDowell, “Equipping Young People with a Biblical Worldview”
• Dr. J.P. Moreland, “The War of Worldviews”
• Dr. Mike Licona, “Can We Really Trust the Gospels”
• Dr. William Lane Craig, “The Case for the Existence of God”

The main page is here.

The thing I like about this conference is that all of the speakers have participated in lectures and debates. Paul Nelson has debated on intelligent design, JP Moreland has debated on the existence of God, Craig debates regularly on the existence of God, Licona has debated Ehrman and others on the resurrection, and Sean McDowell kicked butt in his debate on morality and atheism. Craig Hazen hasn’t debated to my knowledge, but he does tons of lecturing, and people tend to really like his lectures. I once gave an entire set of lectures to my friends Andrew and Jen and they liked Craig Hazen the best.

So the point is that these guys are all really really good speakers! This conference should be a very lively affair.

Filed under: Events, Christopher Hitchens, Conference, Dallas, Debate, DFW, Fort Worth, Forum, Intelligent Design, On Guard, Texas, William Dembski, William Lane Craig

Debate on the origin of life featuring Stephen C. Meyer and Doug Axe

Wow, this should be the most exciting debate of the year:

The conversation about God and Darwin is heating up. After several months of back-and-forth, the theistic evolutionists at BioLogos (notably attacking Stephen Meyer’s Signature in the Cell, in some cases without reading it) will meet and finally face intelligent design proponents, who are coming fresh off their successful salvo of essays and arguments in God and Evolution, which premiered with a conference at Biola University last week.

Next week the Vibrant Dance of Faith and Science becomes the God and evolution showdown in Austin, as the question of whether faith in God can co-exist with Darwinian evolution will be discussed and debated with people of faith on all different points of the spectrum. CSC Director Stephen Meyer will be presenting, as will CSC fellows Bill Dembski, Doug Axe, Richard Sternberg, Paul Nelson, Jack Collins, Walter Bradley, Bruce Gordon, and Ray Bohlin.

The Vibrant Dance of Faith and Science is unique for bringing together key leaders on both sides of the debate. Attendees have three days of speakers and sessions but should prepare for a rumble on Thursday, October 28, when Stephen Meyer and Doug Axe will go up against Darrel Falk and Randy Isaac in a debate on the origin of life, moderated by Walter Bradley. (If you haven’t been following it, there’s no small measure of disagreement between these thinkers).

For more on the conference, which runs from October 26-28 at Grace Covenant Church, and to register, visit vibrantdance.org.

I found this on Evolution News. It’s good to see one of my favorite Christians (Walter Bradley) still in the mix on science and religion.

Filed under: Events, Debate, Doug Axe, Evolution, Faith, God, Intelligent Design, Naturalism, Origin of Life, Religion, Science, Stephen Meyer, Theism, Vibrant Dance of Faith and Science

Michael Behe will be lecturing in the UK this November

Story from Evolution News.

Excerpt:

Controversial ID Scientist tours UK
Professor Michael Behe, a key figure in the Intelligent Design (ID) movement, will challenge his critics in a lecture tour of the UK in November.

Prof. Behe is one of an increasing number of scientists who believe that modern biochemical evidence undermines the basis of Darwinian evolution. The author of two ground-breaking books on ID – ‘Darwin’s Black Box‘ (1996) and ‘The Edge of Evolution‘ (2007) – Behe’s theory of irreducible complexity has drawn attacks from many neo-Darwinists, but not one of them has been able to refute it.

As Behe himself writes, in the years since the publication of ‘Darwin’s Black Box’, “the scientific argument for design is stronger than ever. Despite the enormous progress of biochemistry in the intervening years… despite implacable opposition from some scientists at the highest levels, the book’s argument for design stands… there is very little of the original text I would change if I wrote it today.

“In short, as science advances relentlessly, the molecular foundation of life… is getting exponentially more complex. As it does, the case for the intelligent design of life becomes exponentially stronger.”

Behe’s ‘Darwin or Design? What Does the Science Really Say?’ tour runs from 20-27 November and will comprise evening lectures at the Babbage Lecture Theatre in Cambridge and the Caledonian University in Glasgow, plus events in London, Belfast and Leamington/Warwick. He will also be the main speaker at a day conference (27 November) at Oxford Brookes University.

The tour is organised by the UK-based Centre for Intelligent Design, which exists to promote the public understanding of ID.

For more details of the tour and booking information see: www.darwinordesign.org.uk

Michael Behe is one of my favorite intelligent design speakers.

Filed under: Events, Belfast, Cambridge, Edge of Evolution, Glasgow, Intelligent Design, Irreducible COmplexity, Leamington, Lecture, London, Michael Behe, Oxford, Speaking, UK, Warwick

Do not miss Dr. Craig Evans events in Calgary starting Friday

The Faith Beyond Belief team is doing a series of events in Calgary featuring Canadian historical Jesus scholar Craig Evans. Evans specializes in the historical reliability of the New Testament documents.

Who is Craig Evans?

New Testament scholar, Craig Evans, is the Payzant Distinguished Professor of New Testament at Acadia Divinity College of Acadia University, in Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada. A graduate of Claremont McKenna College, he received his M.Div. from Western Baptist Seminary in Portland, Oregon, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in Biblical Studies from Claremont Graduate University in southern California. A well-known evangelical scholar throughout the world, he is an elected member of the prestigious SNTS, a society dedicated to New Testament studies.

After teaching one year at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, Evans taught at Trinity Western University in British Columbia for twenty-one years, where he directed the graduate program in Biblical Studies and founded the Dead Sea Scrolls Institute. He was also a Visiting Fellow at Princeton Theological Seminary in Princeton, New Jersey.

Author and editor of more than sixty books, including a feature in Lee Strobel’s the Case for the Real Jesus, and hundreds of articles and reviews, Professor Evans has given lectures at Cambridge, Oxford, Yale, the Canadian Museum of Civilization in Ottawa and the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, among others. He also regularly lectures and gives talks at popular conferences and retreats on the Jesus, Archaeology, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible.

Along with countless interviews on radio networks across Canada and the US, Evans has been seen on Dateline NBC, CBC, CTV, Day of Discovery, and many documentaries aired on BBC, The Discovery Channel, History Channel, History Television and others. He also has served as a consultant for the National Geographic Society.

To find out more about Dr.Evans, please visit his website.

The event schedule is here.

Event schedule

Dr. Craig Evans will be speaking at the following Calgary* events. Except where otherwise noted, the talks are free of charge.

To RSVP for any of these events, please email info@faithbeyondbelief.ca or call (403) 689-5890.

Friday, September 24th, 2010

Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospel

Pastor’s breakfast
Full Gospel Tabernacle
9 am – 11 am

The New Testament: Reliable, Relevant and Redemptive

A talk for Christian post-secondary students & faculty
Rocky Mountain College, Chapel
1 pm – 3 pm

4039 Brentwood Road NW, Calgary, Alberta T2L 1L1
rockymountaincollege.ca

Is the Bible Reliable History?: A Discussion

An interactive forum (talk followed by Q&A); open to the public
University of Calgary, Room KNB 132
5:45 pm – 9 pm

Co-sponsored by the Freethinkers of the University of Calgary

2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4
ucalgary.ca

Saturday, September 25th, 2010

The Origins of Christianity & the Importance of the Dead Sea Scrolls

Also includes a talk from our special guest, Dr. Craig Hazen (founder of the M.A. Program in Christian Apologetics at Biola University)

Public seminar, $20 at the door ($10 for students) – cash only
Full Gospel Tabernacle
9 am – 5 pm

Why We Trust the Bible

A youth event
Full Gospel Tabernacle
7 pm – 10 pm

Sunday, September 26th, 2010

The Crux of Christianity: Evidence for the Resurrection

Sunday service
Full Gospel Tabernacle
10 am – 12 pm

Where is this happening?

* Note: All events will be held at the Full Gospel Tabernacle, unless otherwise indicated. A free-will offering will be taken at events at this venue only.

Full Gospel Tabernacle
155 Falconridge Cres NE, Calgary, Alberta T3J 1Z9
fullgospeltabernacle.org

If you would like to donate to Faith Beyond Belief, and you should, you can donate at the Faith Beyond Belief web site. The Faith Beyond Belief team informs me that they could really use your support, and please tell them that WK (me) sent you.

Craig Evans is first-rate scholar who is respected across the ideological spectrum. He has been doing stuff with John Ankerberg, participating in debates with John Dominic Crossan, and debating against Bart Ehrman. Canadians should be thrilled to get someone of his caliber in their country. The fact that the organizers have not neglected to schedule academic outreach events is significant. Calgary is the best city in Canada, and located next to the Rocky Mountains.

If you can’t attend the events, but want to learn more about Craig Evans, try this:

• Craig Evans vs Bart Ehrman debate on the reliability of the gospels

Filed under: Events, Alberta, Apologetics, Bible, Calgary, Canada, Canadian, Christian Apologetics, Christianity, Conference, Craig Evans, Dead Sea Scrolls, Debate, Evidence, Faith, Faith Beyond Belief, Gospels, Lecture, New Testament, Reason, Schedule