# Unlikely, Lucky, or Providential?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900>\
**Category:** Peaceful Science\
**Created:** [March 8, 2022, 2:01pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900 "2022-03-08T14:01:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/peacefulscience/original/2X/6/6b7bf72453a5c60b0919b6b89a27dc18bc52382c.png) [@system](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 2:01pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/1 "2022-03-08T14:01:08Z")

</div>

> **[Unlikely, Lucky, or Providential?](https://peacefulscience.org/newsletter/unlikely-lucky-providential/)**
>
> Evolution proceeds by a long series of improbable events. So, does that mean evolution is unlikely? Or that we are lucky? Or this just divine providence?

> Evolution proceeds by a long series of improbable events. So, does that mean evolution is unlikely? Or that we are lucky? Or this just divine providence?

In _Mere Theistic Evolution_, Murray and Churchill respond to the theological objections of Christians skeptical of evolution. One objection to which they respond is the apparent contradiction between “random” evolution and the doctrine of providence.

How do we understand a long series of improbable events? Unlikely? Luck? Or Providence?

Stephen Meyer is one of the most prominent Intelligent Design scholars. He argues an improbable series of events demonstrate that evolution is unlikely. Therefore, we need not determine if evolution is in conflict with Christian theology.

William Lane Craig is a leading philosopher, and he disagrees. He writes,

> Properly understood, random mutations are entirely compatible with teleology and a robust doctrine of divine providence.

Randomness. An improbable series of events.

Unlikely? Lucky? or Providential?

> **[Do Christians Need to Reconcile Evolutionary Theory and Doctrines of Divine...](https://peacefulscience.org/prints/ets-meyer-mte/)**
>
> Rather than ask, “Can we reconcile orthodox evolutionary theory with orthodox theological commitments?”, I ask: “Should we?”

> **[Response to “Mere Theistic Evolution”](https://peacefulscience.org/prints/ets-wlc-mte/)**
>
> Murray and Churchill’s paper do an admirable job defending theistic evolution against theological objections.

> **[On Mere Theistic Evolution](https://peacefulscience.org/prints/ets-mccall-mte/)**
>
> The Christian community needs to see more humility from its intellectual leaders—and more patience and less pressure to crank out surefire answers to hard questions on complex issues.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/peacefulscience/original/2X/6/6b7bf72453a5c60b0919b6b89a27dc18bc52382c.png) [@system](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 2:01pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/2 "2022-03-08T14:01:08Z")

</div>

Pinned globally on March 8, 2022, 2:01pm UTC



---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_Harshman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/john_harshman/32/1121_2.png) [@John\_Harshman](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/John_Harshman)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 2:13pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/3 "2022-03-08T14:13:58Z")

</div>

Can you say “Texas sharpshooter”? I knew you could. Or perhaps the lottery fallacy is more appropriate here. Or maybe both.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joe\_Felsenstein](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/joe_felsenstein/32/8176_2.png) [@Joe\_Felsenstein](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Joe_Felsenstein)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 6:09pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/4 "2022-03-08T18:09:36Z")

</div>

Now that you’ve said that, I can see that it was inevitable that you were going to say that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_Harshman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/john_harshman/32/1121_2.png) [@John\_Harshman](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/John_Harshman)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 6:11pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/5 "2022-03-08T18:11:07Z")

</div>

Denial may not be just a river in Egypt, but I’m pretty sure that Providence is just a city in Rhode Island.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:14pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/6 "2022-03-08T19:14:13Z")

</div>

> [@system](#):
>
> Stephen Meyer is one of the most prominent Intelligent Design scholars.

The word “scholar” wishes to register a complaint.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:22pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/7 "2022-03-08T19:22:45Z")

</div>

WL Craig:

> This fact became clear to me in the course of my preparation for my debate with the eminent evolutionary biologist Francisco Ayala on the tenability of Intelligent Design in biology.[8](https://peacefulscience.org/prints/ets-wlc-mte/#fn:8) According to Ayala, when evolutionary biologists say that the mutations that lead to evolutionary development are random, they do _not_ mean “occurring by chance.” Rather they mean “occurring irrespective of their usefulness to the organism.” Now this is hugely significant! The scientist is not, despite the impression given by partisans on both sides of the divide, making the presumptuous philosophical claim that biological mutations occur by chance and, hence, that the evolutionary process is undirected or purposeless. Rather he means that mutations do not occur for the benefit of the host organism. If we take “random” to mean “irrespective of usefulness to the organism,” then randomness is not incompatible with direction or purpose.

This does not, however, mean that mutations cannot also be considered random in the sense of occurring without direction or purpose of any sort. If God were causing specific mutations to occur because he wanted them to, would we be able to detect this? I don’t think so, which would mean Craig has a point. But that seems a very slender thread on which to hang an argument: Divine providence is indistinguishable from random chance, so we are free to believe in divine providence when what we see is fully consistent with random chance.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_Harshman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/john_harshman/32/1121_2.png) [@John\_Harshman](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/John_Harshman)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:27pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/8 "2022-03-08T19:27:12Z")

</div>

> [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
>
> (Quoting Craig) Rather he means that mutations do not occur for the benefit of the host organism. If we take “random” to mean “irrespective of usefulness to the organism,” then randomness is not incompatible with direction or purpose.

While this is true, the said direction or purpose would appear not to be the benefit of the organism. So where’s the benevolent deity in that? What would be the direction or purpose inherent in what appears to be a random walk?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:45pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/9 "2022-03-08T19:45:26Z")

</div>

> [@John\_Harshman](#):
>
> While this is true, the said direction or purpose would appear not to be the benefit of the organism. So where’s the benevolent deity in that? What would be the direction or purpose inherent in what appears to be a random walk?

I’m guessing Craig could say that God wanted specific beneficial mutations to occur, particularly those necessary for an organism to arise with the mental capacities possessed by humans, but would arrange things so that these mutations occurred at no more than the frequency with which such mutations would be expected to occur by chance.

That’s the best I can do. It all seems unnecessarily contrived to me, a bit like saying God could have created a nested hierarchy if he wanted to. Sure, but why would he want to?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Puck\_Mendelssohn](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/puck_mendelssohn/32/11849_2.png) [@Puck\_Mendelssohn](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Puck_Mendelssohn)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:46pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/10 "2022-03-08T19:46:51Z")

</div>

> [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
>
> The word “scholar” wishes to register a complaint.

At least the apologist for genocide didn’t apply that word to himself. That would have been doubly awful.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_Harshman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/john_harshman/32/1121_2.png) [@John\_Harshman](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/John_Harshman)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:50pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/11 "2022-03-08T19:50:03Z")

</div>

> [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
>
> Sure, but why would he want to?

Well, there is a long theological tradition involving God hiding his presence from the world, because reasons.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:50pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/12 "2022-03-08T19:50:21Z")

</div>

> [@Puck\_Mendelssohn](#):
>
> At least the apologist for genocide didn’t apply that word to himself.

Are you referring to Craig here? Or Meyer?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Puck\_Mendelssohn](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/puck_mendelssohn/32/11849_2.png) [@Puck\_Mendelssohn](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Puck_Mendelssohn)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:52pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/13 "2022-03-08T19:52:51Z")

</div>

To Craig. So far as I know, Meyer has not (yet) been an apologist for genocide.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 8, 2022, 7:55pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/14 "2022-03-08T19:55:09Z")

</div>

In fairness, I think it is accurate to call Craig a scholar, albeit one who sometimes expresses positions that are silly or repugnant.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/tim/32/9381_2.png) [@Tim](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Tim)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 3:40am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/15 "2022-03-09T03:40:33Z")

</div>

I believe this may derive from a stock phrase of the DI (which **both** WLC and Meyer are members of): “scientists and scholars” – designed to obscure the fact that many of their more prominent apologists, such as Meyer himself, aren’t actually scientists, in spite of the fact that they opine frequently on scientific topics.

This has led me to subconsciously interpret “scholar” as ‘dodgy apologist with a PhD’, which has in turn led me to react with somewhat less than awed reverence when some academic (often with what appears to be an apologetic axe to grind) is introduced here as a “visiting scholar”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chris\_Falter](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/chris_falter/32/3811_2.png) [@Chris\_Falter](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Chris_Falter)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 4:48am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/16 "2022-03-09T04:48:39Z")

</div>

> [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
>
> If God were causing specific mutations to occur because he wanted them to, would we be able to detect this? I don’t think so, which would mean Craig has a point. But that seems a very slender thread on which to hang an argument: Divine providence is indistinguishable from random chance, so we are free to believe in divine providence when what we see is fully consistent with random chance.

The upshot is that God’s existence (and if that is accepted, God’s characteristics) cannot be established by scientific inquiry. Which seems like a sound position to take, IMO.

Blessings,  
Chris

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![John\_Harshman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/john_harshman/32/1121_2.png) [@John\_Harshman](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/John_Harshman)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 5:15am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/17 "2022-03-09T05:15:54Z")

</div>

> [@Chris\_Falter](#):
>
> The upshot is that God’s existence (and if that is accepted, God’s characteristics) cannot be established by scientific inquiry.

Doesn’t that seem the least bit odd? God doesn’t impinge on the world in any detectable way?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/tim/32/9381_2.png) [@Tim](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Tim)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 5:30am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/18 "2022-03-09T05:30:10Z")

</div>

> [@John\_Harshman](#):
>
> Doesn’t that seem the least bit odd? God doesn’t impinge on the world in any detectable way?

Only if you also specify that God “wants a personal relationship” with us (or similar), which unfortunately (for the argument) many Christians do.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![faded\_Glory](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faded_glory/32/7167_2.png) [@faded\_Glory](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/faded_Glory)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 7:33am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/19 "2022-03-09T07:33:35Z")

</div>

Except when he walked on water in full view of everyone.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Faizal\_Ali](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/faizal_ali/32/12416_2.png) [@Faizal\_Ali](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Faizal_Ali)\
**Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 12:21pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900/20 "2022-03-09T12:21:04Z")

</div>

> [@Tim](#):
>
> This has led me to subconsciously interpret “scholar” as ‘dodgy apologist with a PhD’, which has in turn led me to react with somewhat less than awed reverence when some academic (often with what appears to be an apologetic axe to grind) is introduced here as a “visiting scholar”.

On a vaguely related note: Several years ago the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada launched an initiative where they identified six distinct roles that should be undertaken by someone to be considered a medical expert. When they sought the opinions of medical trainees about these roles, “scholar” was the one that evoked the least positive response.

![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/uploads/peacefulscience/original/2X/e/ea57ec90b53912e06013c97e1d8d55659c830a61.png)

> **[CanMEDS Framework](https://www.royalcollege.ca/en/canmeds/canmeds-framework.html)**
>
> This inventory is a way for medical educators to share their great ideas

> [@Tim](#):
>
> Only if you also specify that God “wants a personal relationship” with us (or similar), which unfortunately (for the argument) many Christians do.

It seems that many Christians have no problem reconciling this. Craig, for instance, believes God is only known thru something called “the personal witness of the Holy Spirit”. I’m not sure what that is, but presumably it has little to do with totaling up mutations in a genome.

[Next page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/unlikely-lucky-or-providential/14900.md?page=2)