Posted on 06/11/2013 3:34:14 PM PDT by NYer
|
A good place to start is with an argument by Thomas Aquinas, the great 13th century philosopher and theologian. The argument starts with the not-very-startling observation that things move. But nothing moves for no reason. Something must cause that movement, and whatever caused that must be caused by something else, and so on. But this causal chain cannot go backwards forever. It must have a beginning. There must be an unmoved mover to begin all the motion in the universe, a first domino to start the whole chain moving, since mere matter never moves itself.
A modern objection to this argument is that some movements in quantum mechanics — radioactive decay, for example — have no discernible cause. But hang on a second. Just because scientists don't see a cause doesn't mean there isn't one. It just means science hasn't found it yet. Maybe someday they will. But then there will have to be a new cause to explain that one. And so on and so on. But science will never find the first cause. That's no knock on science. It simply means that a first cause lies outside the realm of science.
Another way to explain this argument is that everything that begins must have a cause. Nothing can come from nothing. So if there's no first cause, there can't be second causes — or anything at all. In other words, if there's no creator, there can't be a universe.
But what if the universe were infinitely old, you might ask. Well, all scientists today agree that the universe is not infinitely old — that it had a beginning, in the big bang. If the universe had a beginning, then it didn't have to exist. And things which don't have to exist must have a cause.
There's confirmation of this argument from big-bang cosmology. We now know that all matter, that is, the whole universe, came into existence some 13.7 billion years ago, and it's been expanding and cooling ever since. No scientist doubts that anymore, even though before it was scientifically proved, atheists called it "creationism in disguise". Now, add to this premise a very logical second premise, the principle of causality, that nothing begins without an adequate cause, and you get the conclusion that since there was a big bang, there must be a "big banger".
 It takes faith to believe in everything coming from nothing. It takes only reason to believe in everything coming from God. |
But is this "big banger" God? Why couldn't it be just another universe? Because Einstein's general theory of relativity says that all time is relative to matter, and since all matter began 13.7 billion years ago, so did all time. So there's no time before the big bang. And even if there is time before the big bang, even if there is a multiverse, that is, many universes with many big bangs, as string theory says is mathematically possible, that too must have a beginning.
An absolute beginning is what most people mean by 'God'. Yet some atheists find the existence of an infinite number of other universes more rational than the existence of a creator. Never mind that there is no empirical evidence at all that any of these unknown universes exists, let alone a thousand or a gazillion.
How far will scientists go to avoid having to conclude that God created the universe? Here's what Stanford physicist Leonard Susskind said: "Real scientists resist the temptation to explain creation by divine intervention. We resist to the death all explanations of the world based on anything but the laws of physics." Yet the father of modern physics, Sir Isaac Newton, believed fervently in God. Was he not a real scientist? Can you believe in God and be a scientist, and not be a fraud? According to Susskind, apparently not. So who exactly are the closed-minded ones in this debate?
The conclusion that God exists doesn't require faith. Atheism requires faith. It takes faith to believe in everything coming from nothing. It takes only reason to believe in everything coming from God.
I'm Peter Kreeft, professor of philosophy at Boston College, for Prager University.
As Julian of Norwich writes, "In this vision he showed me a little thing, the size of a hazelnut, and it was round as a ball. I looked at it with the eye of my understanding and thought "What may this be?" And it was generally answered thus: "It is all that is made." I marvelled how it might last, for it seemed it might suddenly have sunk into nothing because of its littleness. And I was answered in my understanding: "It lasts and ever shall, because God loves it."
“Consciousness is the singular for which there is no plural.” — Erwin Schrodinger
“Consciousness is the ground of all being.” — Amit Goswami
Nothing with form, anyway. Just energy/consciousness. Just The Thing Itself. Just God.
Which leaves this question: Out of what did God create all that there is?
And the logical answer is: Out of God. There was nothing else out of which it could have been created. So, what does that make us and everything around us? Why, the manifest body of God, of course.
There is no “out there.”
Interesting article. I don’t agree with some of what the author says, but on the basic point of existence vs. non-existence of God, his argument is solid as can be.
(WARNING: Very long.)
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9403/evidence.html
create ex nihlo - out of nothing (that is to say there was not anything) He created by the power of His Word. As you say, God is spirit, God is a conscious Mind.
When you say your logic tells you He created our of God you make a dangerous inference. You move from a transcendent Being to a pantheistic god. God is not made of anything...He is spirit. You are not a body... you are a spirit.. As CSLewis said when asked if he believes he has a soul, he answered, "No, I do not have a soul. I am a soul. I have a body." You are made in the likeness and image of an immaterial God.
You seem to preume to require that God requires matter and energy to create. He need substrate? He does not.
You are not the manifest body of God. God is Spirit! You are falling for the oldest lie in the world....that you are God. Genesis 3:5.....you shall be as god (given to us by none other than the serpent). There is great danger in you believing this. I ask you to clarify this in your mind as soon as possible.
I find most people do not understand the Standard Model theory. They seem to think that there was a superdense pellet of material existing in empty space from time immemorial which blew up. This is a misunderstanding of the model. The theory says ALL matter and energy and physical space and time came to be. Remember in the absence of space, matter cannot exist. In the absence of time, events cannot occur. So, the cause of the Big Bang had to be a transcendent being.
For a more complete explanation you might want to look at the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin theorem.
Sorry to interpose my comments into your conversation.
The way God can show up in this world is through what God created. “We are the image and likeness of God.” IOW, there was nothing but God, so outof Godness, so to speak, God created all, and is all, and is expressing as all.
Is God infinite? If not, how can a limited being be God? If God is infinite, then God must be Omnipresent. That means that “there is no spot where god is not.”
The manifest Universe is the body of God. (That includes us, BTW.)
http://www.simplyaninspiredlife.com/quote/manifest-universe-body-god-people-107/
Except that there wasn’t nothing — there was One Thing — God, the consciousness and Spirit that creates. Nothing comes from nothing. Everything comes from No-Thing, so to speak, the Creative Power that we call God.
There was nothing regarding what we call the Universe.
Simply, you have embraced Pantheism. I hope you keep looking. You seem to have a healthy curiosity. I hope you want to know the truth. I have a lot of work to do before sundown. I will be glad to go into depth about this with you , if you like. But it will be latter tonight. IF you prefer that I not, I will respect that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.