Who is Larry Sanger? Larry Sanger is the co-founder of Wikipedia, and he holds a PhD in philosophy from the Ohio State University. Although he was raised in a Christian home, he did not get good answers to his many questions from Christian leaders. In fact, they foolishly made him feel badly for asking questions. He decided to take another look at the arguments for Christian theism.
Here’s the story from Evolution News:
As I found myself returning to the old arguments for the existence of God, I did not slap myself on the forehead and say, “Oh! It turns out that this is a great argument! I guess I believe in God after all!” Even today I deny that, individually, the traditional arguments for the existence of God are particularly persuasive. But I began to examine them in new versions.
I was impressed by a lecture by philosopher of science and well-known apologist Stephen Meyer, who presented versions of the cosmological argument and the fine-tuning argument. Science says the Big Bang was the beginning of the universe. But whatever had a beginning has to have had an explanation. As this is the beginning of matter itself, it cannot have a material cause; thus it must have an immaterial cause (whatever that might be like).
Similarly, certain features of the universe that are absolutely necessary to explaining how fundamental natural laws operate are physical constants. Physicists tell us that if the values of those constants were different, then various things could not have happened; for example, atoms could not have formed, or stars could not have ignited and given off light and heat. But scientists have never offered an explanation for these constants.
He mentions Stephen C. Meyer, so let’s talk about that.
I want you, the reader, to consider that the arguments of Stephen C. Meyer, and the people like him, do work on non-Christians. If you are still batting around “arguments” from people like Aquinas and C.S. Lewis, then you are trying to build a wall with spaghetti, instead of with bricks. The new arguments are much better than what you learned in Sunday school. They are much better than what you heard from your parents and pastors. They are much better than what you read in popular Christian books. Much better than anything a seminary professor could teach you.
If you haven’t put in the time on the new scientific arguments, then you better get moving, because there has been a huge revolution in the way that people think about the Big Questions of life. We covered some of them on the Knight and Rose Show, but you’ll be better off getting yourself a book like “The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith”. That book is one stop shopping.
More:
This is a greatly condensed summary; I developed these ideas in much greater depth. But beyond such details, what I dwelled upon more than anything is the fact that the arguments taken together are far more persuasive than I had understood. Individually, the arguments might seem relatively weak. As I said, the Argument from Contingency only shows that a necessary being exists. The Argument from Causality shows only that the universe had a cause outside of itself. The Argument from Design shows only that the universe has some sort of designer or other. An Argument from Morality might add that the designer is benevolent, to some degree, in some way, but not even necessarily personal. But what happens when we combine all the arguments to make a unified case for the existence of God? I’m not sure the idea had ever dawned on me, certainly not with its present vividness. Taken together, the arguments point to a necessary being that exists apart from space, time, and matter. This is the very cause of the universe, which was designed according to orderly abstract laws. Ever more complex properties emerge, one from another, with great beauty and rationality—rationality that exhibits various mind-like features. This order can even be described as good, a cosmos indeed, because life and its preservation seem to be part of the plan, and life is the very standard of value.
And this is the exciting part – he’s going to be a regular contributor at Evolution News:
Editor’s note: We are delighted to welcome Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger as a new contributor. The following is excerpted from his essay, “How a Skeptical Philosopher Becomes a Christian” at LarrySanger.org. See also, “Wikipedia Co-Founder Blasts ‘Appallingly Biased’ Wikipedia Entry on Intelligent Design.”
I love stories like this. I’ve talked this over with Rose. Neither of us grew up in Christian homes, so we had complete freedom to puzzle these things out on our own, and only act according to what we discovered. In my case, I explained to a youth pastor early on that in my family, we liked to argue. So, he gave me apologetics books, and said that in Christianity, there was a long tradition of debating.
I puzzled through these books at my own pace, never having to be forced to go to church, never having to put on a show, and never having to get my Christianity secondhand from people who were terrible at it. I got it straight from the Bible, not from anybody’s words or behaviors. And in the end, it stuck very well. In fact, it never even bothered me that Christianity lost me reputation with other people. After all, they couldn’t defend their views in a debate. Sometimes I think it’s better to do it this way.
