November is a time of family and thanksgiving. Where does apologetic potpourri fit into that? Well … I am thankful for apologetics! This month’s list of random tidbits and musings includes William Lane Craig on the value of apologetics, a brief discussion of the future and present states of science, the Fermi paradox turned about on theology, another cosmological mystery, and a great chart about worldviews.
A lot has been written in the post-modern world about the future (or lack thereof) for apologetics. Is there any use for the classical arguments for God’s existence? William Lane Craig does a great job of outlining how apologetic studies continue to be formative for church and culture even beyond their scholarly uses. He writes, “even if Christian apologetics is not necessary with respect to warranting Christian belief, Christian apologetics may be useful and even necessary with respect to various other ends.” A good read.
It is difficult to predict the future of science, especially as it approaches the big questions. Horgan is fond of making such predictions, and does so in this brief article. Worth a read: “But answers to the biggest questions remain as elusive as ever. Scientists still don’t have a clue why our universe has the form we observe, or how life began on the Earth some 3.6 billion years ago, or whether life exists elsewhere.”
I’ve been waiting for some serious theology to develop in this particular direction for some time. I’ve been so curious that I’ve considered writing it myself. Atheists have a lot to consider in the absence of extraterrestrial life, however, what would happen if such life were to be discovered? How would religion and theology respond? This article doesn’t offer any answers, but asks some good questions. I think, even though it may seem far out, it is a useful thought experiment that may teach us something about more plausible scenarios.
I enjoy a good mystery. I enjoy astrophysics. So of course I love a good astrophysical mystery! This one point directly to the shortcoming of current models of galaxy development.
“Our leading formation theory just can’t be right,” said Grundahl. “There’s nowhere that Fornax could have hidden these ejected stars, so it appears that the clusters couldn’t have been so much larger in the past.”
This is a very helpful chart and I encourage you to take a look. Familiarize yourself with the terminology, but these ideas shape the debate on virtually every issue.