Honestly, it would take 10 pages to counter every point he makes, and the arguments are not that original.
Hardly a point in God’s favour ?
Ah, God of the Gaps - what we can’t explain must be God’s work. It used to be the weather that was unfathomable and thus had to be God’s handywork. Now it’s usually haemoglobine. Luckhoo’s examples seem somewhat outdated to me - when was this written ?
To take one of his statements: “Our world travels around the sun at 66,600 miles per hour. Where does the motive force come from to give this inert mass motive power?” The Earth’s behaviour is a consequence of the way it was formed. I have no idea what “motive power” is supposed to be - planets need no “motive power” to stay in orbit.
“If the world were nearer the sun we would burn up; further away, and we would die of cold. The world is just at the correct angle. What causes the world to go ‘round and round’ the sun?”
With a 100 billion billion stars to pick from, some would have planets at the right distance for life to develop. Pointing out that it’s unlikely that it happened here after the fact is somewhat disingenious. Old canard.
“You guess, I know.” I’m very happy he’s a lawyer and not a judge, if that’s the amount of evidence he needs to form an opinion.
It’s self-consistent, more or less. But a source can’t “back itself up” - other sources are needed. I’m sure someone better versed in the bible will appear with a list of inconsistencies.
And his dismissal of every other holy scripture is somewhat hasty, IMHO:
“Let us bear in mind that neither the Quran nor any other various Bibles have ever attempted to foretell the future at all and even the Pope of Rome has never ventured to claim supernatural knowledge.”
Ouch. The Quran is chock-full of prophecies. Even a heathen like me seems to recall a commandment about false witness - and he’s a lawyer, even ?
Using the “defense” angle is a cute move - as if the bible is accused and we have to prove it false beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof is not on us, but on Luckhoo.
Would I accept it ? Not a chance. His using technical evidence that he either misrepresents or misunderstands hurts his case.