Doesn't God justify existence?
2007-02-13
04:46:26
·
19 answers
·
asked by
stagger_lee1974
2
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
What created science; what came before the Big Bang; what created the Universe and it's continuous nature??
2007-02-13
04:50:56 ·
update #1
How did God get here? We don't know...he is of a different place that cannot be comprehended by the human mind. Perhaps, his place is not restricted by the same physical rules that we have in this Universe. We can, however, through science, understand this universe.
2007-02-13
05:20:21 ·
update #2
Your question is related to the cosmological arguments for a First Cause of existence.
Although I am writing to you about God, faith, etc., I want to let you know that I am an electrical engineer (Ph.D.) as well as a theologian. I have spent twenty years practicing and teaching engineering and science, so what follows is going to be just what you would see if you were in a typical physics class and in an introductory philosophy classes.
The horizontal form of the cosmological argument is as follows:
1. Everything that had a beginning had a cause.
2. The universe had a beginning.
3. Therefore the universe had a Cause.
The first element above is self-evident, since to admit otherwise would amount to the foolish claim that nothing produces something.
The second premise above can be defended philosophically and scientifically. The philosophical defense is:
1. An infinite number of moments cannot be traversed.
2. If there were an infinite number of moments before today, then today would never have come, since an infinite number of moments cannot be traversed.
3. But today HAS come.
4. Hence, there were only a finite number of moments before today (i.e., a beginning of time). And everything with a beginning had a Beginner. Therefore the temporal world had a Beginner (Cause).
Now let's examine the scientific defense for the second premise in the cosmological argument above.
To be a authentic atheist, one must posit that all matter in the universe is eternal- it has always been there and always will be in one form or another. Further, the atheist must hold that creation came out of this matter (ex materia). For an atheist to disagree to these two points, they would in fact be agreeing with the horizontal form of the cosmological argument. As we will see below, the inconsistency between the atheistic belief in the eternity of matter and the scientific evidence creates an irreconcilable dilemma.
When one looks at the scientific evidence, we see that the universe had a beginning with the Big Bang. Moreover, the second law of thermodynamics clearly shows that the universe is running out of energy, so what is running down cannot be eternal.
The universe is said to be expanding. Thus when the "motion picture" of the universe is put in reverse, logically and mathematically it reaches a point where it is nothing (i.e., no space, no time, no matter). So the universe literally came into being out of nothing. BUT, nothing cannot produce something.
The radiation echo given off by the universe, discovered by Nobel Prize winners Arno Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson has the same identical wavelength of that which would be given off by a gigantic explosion. (Big Bang)
Einstein's theory of general relativity demanded a beginning of time, a view he resisted for years.
From the above the cumulative philosophical and scientific evidence for an origin of the material universe provides a strong reason to conclude that there must have been a nonphysical originating Cause of the physical universe. This is the third and final premise of the cosmological argument above.
Ask Mr. Religion
Answering your questions about religion since 1994
http://www.askmrreligion.com
2007-02-13 04:51:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ask Mr. Religion 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
It's a provocative question, but presuming a specific cause just because a particular effect is observed is not logical. I'm not saying you're wrong, because I don't know either... just that it's not logical. The logical error you are making is related to one called the "anthropomorphic principle", which more or less says, well, we're here, so there must be a reason.
Check out Leonard Mlodinow's book, Euclid's Window, and if you get the chance, J. Richard Gott's Time Travel in Einstein's Universe. There are some equally provocative alternative explanations, such as the notion that a particular configuration of the Reimann Curvature Tensor (Google it if you get the chance) REQUIRES the existence of matter, or that it is possible to create micro-universes by altering the properties of so-called Casimir vacuua and Calabi-Yau spaces, something that is beyond our technological reach but theoretically possible, both of which could easily explain "why" universes exist.
But to be honest, it's throwing around a lot of science with just a little data, and your theory is as good as the rest, provided it is testable in some way.
Peace
2007-02-13 04:54:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Don M 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't know.
but just because I do not know does not mean that it must be the work of a diety.
I will work to learn the answer "why" to the best of my ability...
Steven Hawking believes in God and knows far more about the creation of the universe than I could ever hope to understand. There are answers out there, and the limit of YOUR comprehension does not deliniate where God's influence begins...
I understand thermodynamics, you don't. Because you don't understand something, your cognizance ends there, while thousands of others continue working and understanding these processes.
Maybe I'm a witch, I dunno. So is everyone who uses solar energy and cell phones I guess.
2007-02-13 04:54:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by RobotoMR 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Mother Nature
2007-02-13 04:49:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Chazz Drizzler 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
God exists - Logically there can be no creation without a creator, no design without a designer and no laws without a law maker. Did your computer just happen. Of course not. It was designed and created. Don't listen to all those dafties who say God does not exist. They will soon retract their words when the film finishes
2007-02-13 04:54:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Gezza D 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
The problem with using your argument to validate God's existence is that it doesn't explain how God got here then.
I'm not saying that there isn't a God, I'm just saying your line of reasoning doesn't support it.
2007-02-13 04:52:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by marklemoore 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
God created everything from nothing. What I want to know is how did God get here.
Answer: God is a hoax.
2007-02-13 04:51:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The big bang, possibly. We're still searching for the answer to that one, not just settling for "God did it."
2007-02-13 04:49:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
exactly, but what can you do with a disbeliever, a disbeliever remain as a disbeliever even if u show him all the evidence in the world.
can a computer come by itself? or someone figure out a way to created in this detailful way? who put your eyes on the upper of ur head? and divide ur hand into 5 fingers?
let them play until they meet the day of which they have promised.
2007-02-13 04:51:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
Big Bang.
What does "justify existence" mean?
2007-02-13 04:49:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by PHX 3
·
3⤊
1⤋