>
> > Pim:Let's assume that by chance the universe arose with physical
> > constants allowing oxygen breathing carbon life forms to evolve. We are now here and marvel at how well our life form "fits" in the
range of physical constants found in nature. A miracle ? Or an inescapable results ?
> >
> > Randy: A miracle? Not given the parameters of your question. Miracles, as
> > defined in Scripture, have a definite purpose and therefore a "chance"
> > event could not be a miracle.
> >
> > Pim:Why limit yourself to a biblical interpretation when talking about
> chance then ?
>
> Randy: I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I don't completely understand your question.
>
> Since you state that miracles and chance do not have a Biblical interpretation why focus on the biblical meaning of the word ?
Actually, I used the biblical definition of miracle in answering your
question. But it would probably be easier if I used the secular definition
of miracle as an "almost impossible event" to answer your question. In
that case I suppose you could call the universe a "miracle".
But if we just "assume" that the universe arose by chance then the whole
ID argument is moot anyway. This whole thread has been debating the
question of whether or not any evidence exists that would lead us to doubt
the "assumption" that the universe has it's particular physical constants
"by chance".