Thursday, December 25, 2014

Skeptic's Quote

H. G. Wells, British writer, 1866-1946

When asked which person left the most permanent impression on history, he replied that judging a person’s greatness by historical standards:
“By this test, Jesus stands first.”
“I am a historian, I am not a believer, but I must confess as a historian that this penniless preacher from Nazareth is irrevocably the very center of history. Jesus Christ is easily the most dominant figure in all history.”
“Christ is the most unique person of history. No man can write a history of the human race without giving first and foremost place to the penniless teacher of Nazareth.”

Source 


Wishing everyone a very merry and blessed Christmas!

"The Word became flesh and dwelt among us..." John 1:14

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Nature's foreshadowing?

Some theologians, in their attempts to define the distinct roles of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the Trinity, have referred to Christ as the form or pattern of creation.  If this is correct, perhaps the pattern of parthenogenesis (virgin birth) found in nature represents a foreshadowing of the ultimate parthenogenesis:  the virgin birth of Christ.

From Wikipedia, here are some relevant passages on parthenogenesis:

Parthenogenesis /ˌpɑrθənɵˈɛnɨsɨs/ is a form of asexual reproduction in which growth and development of embryos occur without fertilization. In animals, parthenogenesis means development of an embryo from an unfertilized egg cell and is a component process of apomixis.

The word parthenogenesis comes from the Greek παρθένος, parthenos, meaning "virgin" and γένεσις, genesis, meaning "birth".[1] The term is sometimes used inaccurately to describe reproduction modes in hermaphroditic species that can reproduce by themselves because they contain reproductive organs of both sexes in a single individual's body.
Parthenogenesis occurs naturally in many plants, some invertebrate animal species (including nematodes, water fleas, some scorpions, aphids, some bees, some Phasmida and parasitic wasps) and a few vertebrates (such as some fish,[2] amphibians, reptiles[3][4] and very rarely birds[5])

There are no known cases of naturally occurring mammalian parthenogenesis in the wild. Parthenogenetic progeny of mammals would have two X chromosomes, and would therefore be female.
In 1936, Gregory Goodwin Pincus reported successfully inducing parthenogenesis in a rabbit.[74] In April 2004, scientists at Tokyo University of Agriculture used parthenogenesis successfully to create a fatherless mouse.
On June 26, 2007, International Stem Cell Corporation (ISCC), a California-based stem cell research company, announced that their lead scientist, Dr. Elena Revazova, and her research team were the first to intentionally create human stem cells from unfertilized human eggs using parthenogenesis.

On August 2, 2007, after much independent investigation, it was revealed that discredited South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-Suk unknowingly produced the first human embryos resulting from parthenogenesis...This made Hwang the first, unknowingly, to successfully perform the process of parthenogenesis to create a human embryon and, ultimately, a human parthenogenetic stem cell line.

While admittedly speculative, perhaps the pattern of parthenogenesis in the natural world prefigured the most unique virgin birth of the most unique person, of the most unique species, to have ever walked the face of the earth.  After all, wasn't it JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis who often pointed to the old nature mythologies of 'gods dying and rising' as foreshadowings of Christ, the real God-Man, dying and rising from the dead?

Saturday, December 20, 2014

Statistical Odds of the Virgin Birth

Christians and Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, though Muslims do not accept the divinity of Christ as Christians do. If the virgin birth truly occurred, then this miracle could have occurred in one of two ways: supernaturally or hypernaturally.

If it took place supernaturally, then God acted outside the natural law by overriding the known laws of physics and biology. This is by far the most common view and what most people would refer to as a miracle. Such a view is not conducive to scientific inquiry.

If it took place hypernaturally, then God acted within the natural law by employing the known laws of physics and biology to produce an extraordinary, statistically improbable event. Such a view is conducive, even if only in a limited fashion, to scientific inquiry.

So, what if the virgin birth of Jesus Christ was, in fact, a hypernatural miracle? 

A 2007 Slate article, Can a Virgin Give Birth, answers "Yes-but it's very, very, very, very unlikely." In other words, as the article points out, it would be an extremely improbable event, mathematically (and biologically) speaking. But if this extremely improbable event did happen, what of the added coincidence that it would've happened to the one man billions have believed to be a miracle worker (Muslims), billions more have believed to be God in human flesh (Christians), and even quite a few agnostic & atheistic scholars have claimed to be the most influential figure in human history?

While the odds of the virgin birth being a hypernatural miracle are incredibly low, perhaps considering these odds in the larger context of the odds of humanity even existing in the first place might prove a useful comparison.  For example, in 1986, two top cosmologists, Barrow and Tipler*, wrote a book called the Anthropic Cosmological Principle. They were also mathematicians and physicists. In the book, they laid out ten steps which were necessary for human evolution. Borrowing from a blog that briefly summarized some of the key points, here is something particularly relevant:

     "Moreover, in the Anthropic Cosmological Principle two of the world’s leading cosmologists, John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, point out 10 steps in the course of human evolution, such as the development of the DNA base genetic code, the origin of mitochondria in the cells, the origin of photosynthesis, the development of aerobic respiration, the development of the inner skeleton and the development of the eye, each of which is so improbable that before it would have occurred the sun would have ceased to be a main sequence star, and would have incinerated the earth. The odds they calculated for the assembly of the human genome was somewhere around 4 to the -360th power to the 110,000th power — simply an incomprehensible number. For reasons like this as well as others, “there has developed a general consensus among evolutionists that the evolution of intelligent life. . . is so improbable that is unlikely to have occurred on any other planet in the entire visible universe."

Viewed in this broader context, one could say that the odds of a hypernatural virgin birth are much higher than the odds of humanity coming into existence in the first place.   


* Apparently, Dr. Tipler, also makes a positive argument for the virgin birth being a hypernatural miracle in his book The Physics of Christianity.

Sunday, December 7, 2014

Star of Bethlehem

What was it?

Encyclopedia Britannica lays out some of the more popular (naturalistic or hypernatural) theories here.

The spectacular conjunction of Venus and Jupiter, and the multiple, unique conjunctions of Jupiter and the star Regulus, all of which took place in 3/2 BC, happens to be my favorite theory. Here's a fairly recent article on the topic. Incidentally, there is historical evidence of a significant enrollment/registration in this area of the world during this time, and the majority of ancient Christian historians placed Christ's birth in this time window.

Last week, an astronomer whom I follow in science-faith matters, presented new evidence for his favored theory:  a recurring nova.

And of course, some of the faithful believe it was simply a one-time supernatural manifestation of God's glory, unexplainable by science.

Here's some beautiful music to bring the sacred story to life:




Saturday, December 6, 2014

St. Nicholas Day

The man. The myth. The legend.

Historically speaking, his life, legends, and more modern adaptation as Santa Claus have endured, on a global scale, for approximately 1,700 years. In fact, one could probably make a credible argument for St. Nicholas being one of the most influential people in the history of mankind.

There is ample historical evidence to support the claim that St. Nicholas (of Myra) was indeed a real person, and in particular, a 4th century Bishop. Beyond that, however, much is unknown from an historian's point of view. That being said, I've cited a few passages from Wikipedia which provide us with some valuable insights.

"Saint Nicholas (Greek: Ἅγιος Νικόλαος, Hagios Nikólaos, Latin: Sanctus Nicolaus); (15 March 270 – 6 December 343),[3][4] also called Nikolaos of Myra, was a historic 4th-century Christian saint and Greek[5] Bishop of Myra..."

"He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, such as putting coins in the shoes of those who left them out for him, and thus became the model for Santa Claus, whose modern name comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, itself from a series of elisions and corruptions of the transliteration of "Saint Nikolaos".

"The historical Saint Nicholas is commemorated and revered among Anglican,[8] Catholic, Lutheran, and Orthodox Christians. In addition, some Baptist,[9] Methodist,[10] Presbyterian,[11] and Reformed churches have been named in honor of Saint Nicholas.[12]"

"The legends with the most likely historical basis are the stories of Nicholas helping three girls and stories of Nicholas helping sailors. Others, especially the legend of the three murdered children, are much later additions to Nicholas lore, historian Dr. Adam English concludes[34] in a new biography of Nicholas for Baylor University Press based on a four-year study of current historical research into Nicholas of Myra."


Friday, December 5, 2014