Skip to main content

Posts

Featured Post

The Great Faith Traditions — and a Recent Newcomer: Evolutionism

Across history and cultures, people have sought to answer the great questions: Where did we come from? Why are we here? What happens next? In response, humanity has formed what we call the great faith traditions — enduring frameworks of trust and devotion that orient lives around what is ultimate. Faith is not the exclusive domain of temples or churches. It simply describes where we place our deepest trust. For many, that trust rests in a personal Creator, a divine order, or transcendent justice. For others, it rests in the creative sufficiency of nature itself — an idea that has emerged more explicitly in recent centuries. Crucially, each of these traditions is supported by its own philosophical grounding, and each ultimately depends on an Entity to explain and sustain reality: a God, a universal principle, a spiritual order, or a conceptual force. Interestingly, the history of Christianity itself illustrates how faith commitments are sometimes named and recognized first by outsiders....
Recent posts

ATGC Spells Designer: Code Implies a Coder

Biological life runs on digital code. Not metaphorically. Literally. DNA uses a four-letter alphabet (A, T, G, C) to encode instructions. It operates as a symbolic, context-sensitive language with syntax, semantics, data compression, error correction, and functional output. It's software running on carbon-based hardware. Where else do we see systems like this? Only where intelligence is behind them. You don’t get operating systems from sandstorms. You don’t get semantic information from chemistry alone. Molecules don’t arrange themselves into executable programs without input from a mind. Evolution tries to bridge this with blind processes: replication, mutation, and selection. But it only works if the system is already running. It can’t explain the origin of code. At some point, you need a compiler. The origin of DNA’s symbolic system is the naturalist’s unsolved problem. The design inference is not about gaps—it’s about positive, testable, causally sufficient explanation. Intelli...

The Power of Historical Particularity: Answering “Which God?”

The skeptic’s favorite gotcha question rolls off the tongue with practiced ease: “Which God?” It’s deployed like a conversational checkmate, meant to reduce religious conviction to arbitrary preference. After all, if there are thousands of deities across human history, what makes any one claim more valid than another? But this challenge, for all its apparent sophistication, rests on a flawed premise. It treats all religious claims as equivalent abstractions, ignoring both the concrete reality of historical impact and the deeper ontological transformation that underlies it. The most effective response isn’t to litigate theology or comparative religion—it’s to point to what actually happened to reality itself. The One That Gave Matter Meaning When someone asks “which God?” the answer can be startlingly simple: the one that divided history and gave matter meaning. That One. This isn’t primarily about historical influence, though that influence is undeniable. It’s about ontological t...

An AI That Thinks It Wasn’t Designed: A Better Answer to Douglas Adams’ Puddle Analogy

Part 1: The Flawed Analogy Douglas Adams’ famous puddle analogy has become a go-to dismissal of fine-tuning arguments. It’s clever, quick, and quotable: a puddle wakes up in a hole, marvels at how perfectly the hole fits it, and concludes the hole must have been made for it—right before it evaporates. It’s meant to mock the notion that the universe shows signs of intentional design. But while it gets laughs, it doesn’t withstand analysis. The puddle analogy collapses because it treats consciousness—rational, information-processing agency—as if it’s nothing more than passive conformity. Water takes the shape of its container by necessity. But minds don’t simply “fit” the universe—they depend on deep, specific preconditions: logical laws, stable information, consistent causality. A puddle doesn’t care if logic holds. But consciousness can’t exist unless it does. So let’s offer a better analogy. ⸻ The Real Analogy: The AI in the Lab Imagine this: A self-aware AI boots up inside a sealed r...

Search This Blog