The Mars Hill Club

"Answering the Toughest Questions About Intelligent Design:" that's the subtitle of William Dembski's recent book, The Design Revolution. It is also the title for the Mars Hill Club discussion scheduled for January 18 (Thursday). Please join us -- either on-line at any time by posting your comments to this blog, or in person January 18 at 7:30 PM in Costa Mesa.

Critics of the Intelligent Design (ID) movement frequently mischaracterize, misunderstand, or are ignorant of its basic tenets. Of course, as with any scientific endeavor, there are lots of legitimate questions which may be sincerely asked. After a number of years debating his critics, Dr. Dembski had heard all the questions and objections of both types. So, he wrote a book to make available sound answers to over forty issues raised by both experts and lay persons.

One of our Mars Hill Club regulars, Chris Wright, contributed the following review of our first Apologetics Jeopardy! event on January 4, moderated by Bruce Paolozzi. Here is his report:

Mars Hill has begun a new and exciting forum for developing disciples trained in the art of clear thinking and persuasive reasoning: Apologetics Jeopardy. If you can drive out to Costa Mesa on a Thursday Mars Hill Jeopardy night (click on the Caldendar to find when the next one is scheduled), you might go home jumping up and down and screaming with more excitement than a TV game show contestant!

Join me this evening (Thursday, January 11) as we take a fascinating journey back through the legal history of the Roman Empire to the first century imperial court. We will look at the evidence from the book of Acts that leads some to conclude that this book, & its prequel, the gospel of Luke, were written as the legal documents defending the apostle Paul in his trial against the charges of the Jewish Sanhedrin before the emperial court of Emperor Nero.

We will cover a number of fascinating historical issues, including the political & religious intrigues of first century Judaism just before the Jewish Revolt (AD 66-73) that reached its apex with the Roman destruction of the Second Temple & the expulsion of the Jews from Jerusalem. We will also survey the Roman legal system, including how one qualified to appeal before the imperial court & what that appeal would have looked like. Then we will look at the legal signatures that abound in Acts. We will derive from that the charges that were likely lodged against Paul by the Sanhedrin, & why Paul chose to appeal his case to Caesar.

In addition to the apologetics prize I have already selected for tomorrow night's winner of our first Apologetics Jeopardy! game, a regular supporter has donated a special prize that will accompany the one I have picked out.

While the prize I am offering will lubricate your mind, our supporter's prize will care for your exterior -- here is his description:

I'd like to sweeten your pot Gretchen. I will donate a luxurious $35 retail 2oz tube of micro layer technology sunscreen face cream to the winner (www.sundurancemlt.com). This is the sunscreen that world famous golfing instructor David Leadbetter uses and has promoted in his sun awareness campaign against melanoma (just in case the macho guys think it is only a girly product). I can substitute that, if the winner wants, with a $44 retail jar of natural dead sea body polish from the St. Regis hotel resort and Spa (eucalyptus, orange/vanilla or pear fragrance). The winner gets their pick.

Thanks for your work developing right thinking Christians.

Whether you've ever attended Mars Hill Club before or not, you will certainly enjoy this Thursday's outing with moderator Bruce Paolozzi. That's right, on January 4, we will be playing our own version of this popular fact, idea, & history game with an apologetics twist & without the question format.

If you love apologetics, that is, giving a reason for the faith you hold, then you will love Apologetics Jeopardy!

I will be offering at least a first prize that will be enjoyed by any apologetics aficionado. If we have enough contestants & the score is close enough, I will also award second & third place prizes.

On January 4th, 2007, Mars Hill Club will hold an apologetics game; Apologetics Jeopardy! Tell your friends – anyone in attendance can play! That’s right, you don’t need to have a degree or be a regular, just be there at 7:30 to sign up (latecomers will not be eligible to play). Gretchen Passantino will have a special prize for the overall winner.

This game will operate differently from standard Jeopardy! The categories will be: Cults, Science, Resurrection, Skeptics Say..., Bible Difficulties, and Theism. Instead of answering questions in the form of a question, each category will contain an attack against Christianity, theism, or the Christian worldview. Contestants will answer the attacks. Questions will have point values, and answers will be adjudicated by our panel of judges. If the majority of judges agree that the contestant has answered adequately, then points will be assigned.

Here's what Cary Cook has planned for this Thursday evening, December 14:

Anyone who spent a few years in the company of Bob Passantino should know that logic is reliable for determining propositional truth. If you don't know that, don't bother coming to my session.

But the value of logic totally depends on the meaningfulness of the premises plugged into it. If a premise doesn't have a clear meaning, logical conclusions drawn from it will also be unclear. Premises are constructed of terms which represent concepts and categories. Recognition of the concepts and categories in any premise is necessary for the understanding of that premise.

A work in progress by Dr. Tom Snyder

The use of the basic laws of logic can help us determine what is true and what is false. The basic logical argument takes the form of two interconnected premises (or assertions) and a conclusion based on those premises:

Thus:

All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

I propose to apply this form to prove the existence of God in the following six arguments. Each of these arguments is a form of what has been called “The Transcendental Argument.”

1. All rational, rationally inescapable, existentially inescapable, epistemologically inescapable, transcendent, eternal, objective, non-material, and personal* entities are ultimately dependent on a rational, rationally inescapable, existentially inescapable, epistemologically inescapable, transcendent, eternal, objective, non-material, and personal being, or God.

Here is a helpful partial glossary for the discussion Paul Ethington will be leading tonight at our Mars Hill Club discussion group in Costa Mesa. You can also find it at the end of his blog posting immediately below this.

Hope to see many of you tonight in person, & others of you posting and/or responding here before, during, & after.

A PARTIAL GLOSSARY
Design and Purpose – the belief that there is a reason for all that happens in the larger scope of things and that there is a designer who ultimately is in control. Furthermore, it is the belief that the designer is not capricious or arbitrary in his creation, but that all things will be made clear in the long run.

Developing a Worldview

When I see the world around me, even my own life, I see it through a set of presuppositions. Learning began with my own biological senses, discovering my limitations, deciding what worked, what was safe and what brought reward. It progressed with thought processes which categorized, predicted and compared. It was willing to place facts and ideas in abeyance for verification and refinement. But I was not able to assemble a complete framework, a complete belief system, which took all things into account. It took great leaps as I chose to trust the testimony of others and to reach beyond my immediate experience. For my worldview I would develop presuppositions on the authority of God’s Word and of those whom I could trust within that authority. These tenants are foundational to my belief system and require no further proof. The world is too large and I am too limited to feign omniscience. “Worldview” not only involves these decisions and influences but the existence of a consistent and identifiable set of parameters, a resident structure within the mind and heart which makes one’s choices and perceptions consistent and dependable. Arbitrary choices and capricious behaviors are disallowed. Unreasonable behaviors are scrutinized as lacking integrity. Behaviors merely derived from the socially acceptable and politically correct are called into question. When ones worldview produces what appears to some as outlandish, others may ask, “Where on earth did you get that idea?” If I am a Christian, the answer had better be an honest examination of that derived from Christ. Do I really have a “Christian” worldview?