By one atheist’s definition, the phrase “There is no evidence for God” means,
“This “fact” could not exist unless there was a Creator God.”
Well, each and every one of these posts is giving examples, examples that are based on scientific facts, facts that are attested to and verified by atheist scientists that show that the laws of physics as we know them are not able to account for the facts that we observe.
Therefore citing Creator God as the probable cause for these facts is not an argument from ignorance because Creator God is the answer that best fits the scientific evidence. The only thing keeping people from accepting the obvious answer to what we observe is an a priori rejection of the existence of Creator God. In other words,
According to known and accepted scientific laws and observations, the evidence that I am citing in this series of posts COULD NOT EXIST unless there was a Creator God.
Are there alternative speculations proposed? Of course there are! There have to be because in the atheist world-view Creator God cannot exist. Have you ever asked yourself why there are dozens of hypotheses and dozens of variations of those hypotheses? It's because NONE of them work according to the laws of physics. If any one of them was workable according to scientific laws, then that would be the end of it. Like the saying, "It was in the last place that I looked," if any one of the atheist speculations was acceptable there wouldn't be any more theories. The fact is, based on known science, NONE of them are acceptable.
I find it amusingly ironic how atheists, with zero basis from a scientific perspective, invent mythologies to explain the coming into being of our universe while Christians are able to use scientific laws and facts to show:
1. That the “Creation Event” happened, and
2. That it did not happen by accident.
Because of clear scientific evidence, we know that:
. Anything that exists has an explanation of it’s existence, either:
In the necessity of its own nature (It can’t NOT exist), or
In an external cause.
. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is external to as well as transcendent to the universe. That is because:
. Existing outside of time, the Cause is infinite or Eternal,
. Existing outside of matter (which is finite), the Cause is immaterial or Spiritual,
. Existing as the Cause of time and energy, space, matter and the laws of physics, the Cause is immeasurably more powerful than the mathematically precise universe and its exquisitely Finely Tuned constants and quantities.
The Cause cannot be “scientific” because neither matter nor the laws of physics (i.e., the laws that science has observed and identified), existed prior to the Singularity.
Therefore the Cause of the beginning of the universe is not scientific but Personal.
The transcendent Cause of the universe is therefore on the order of a Mind.
That Cause is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent.
That Cause, is what is normally described as God.
Because of clear scientific evidence, we know that:
. The universe exists.
. Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence.
Because the above premises are true and coherent, the following conclusion must also be true:
The explanation of the existence of the universe is God
. According to atheism the universe doesn’t have an explanation of its existence. Atheists say that “It just happened.” Everything that we see came from nothing by nothing. Over a dozen theories and over a dozen more variations on those theories have come and gone in a vain attempt to rule out God as the Cause of a beginning universe. Despite the current scientific knowledge described above, atheists persist in stating that either matter has always existed (impossible) or that matter created itself (also impossible). Why do they do this? Because >
. If there is an explanation of the universe’s existence, then atheism is not true. And that is because the only explanation that fits the evidence of how and why the universe came into being is Creator God. That is why Richard Dawkins himself has lately admitted that a good case could be made for the existence of a Deistic God.
Actually, I believe that some day there won’t be any atheists. There will be people for God and people against God but there won’t be anyone who believes that God doesn’t exist. And, irony of ironies it will be science that will prove the existence of God.
As one atheist single mother of two 'useless fetal blobs that managed to survive,' said recently, “A big fuck-you to anyone who believes in original sin. The christian god, should it exist, should be fought and resisted by every MORAL person who has ever lived.”
Mmm, I’m wandering off topic . . .
. Because of overwhelming scientific evidence, most atheists do grudgingly admit that the universe does indeed have a beginning.
. Hence, most atheists are implicitly committed to God being the explanation of why the universe exists.
This is why I call atheists irrational agnostics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
What overwhelming scientific evidence are you talking about? If you're talking about red shift, all it is evidence for is an expansion of the universe. That's it. Nobody knows what happened before that expansion.
Even if the universe did have a beginning, nobody knows how it began. The universe itself could be cyclical, and could always have existed. Nobody knows. I don't know. You don't know.
What I do know is that your god is based on faith and not anything observable. Even if I accept your notion that the universe has an uncaused cause, who is to say that cause is your particular god? What evidence do you have that it was one god and not many? The burden of proof is still on you to demonstrate that a god (however you define that term) created the universe, and that it was itself uncaused. After all, if the universe had a cause, it does not follow that its cause was uncaused. It could most certainly have been caused, and there could be an infinite number of causes. Why not? It's just as plausible.
I reject your theism not because of the big bang theory or evolution, but because there is a lack of evidence to back up your mythology. I am not an agnostic, because an agnostic says that gods are unknowable; I say that if they exist and have an effect upon the world in the present day, there should be evidence of their existence.
What overwhelming scientific evidence are you talking about?
Did I use the word “overwhelming” somewhere? Sorry, I can't find it.
==============
“Nobody knows what happened before that expansion.”
You’re right and that’s a good point. However we do know an awful lot about what it couldn’t have been before the Singularity.
For example we know - mmm, just a minute. It might be important for you to know that anything that I’m stating re: origins, at least regarding evidence, I’m taking from atheist scientists. Christian scientists may and probably do make the same claims but if I back something up with a comment, fact or figure in this series of posts, in order to be of help to people such as yourself I’m making sure that I’m using “one of your own” so to speak.
Ok, so we know that the universe could NOT be cyclical. There are many reasons by one is that we know, from clear scientific evidence that in a cyclical model, levels of entropy are carried forward into the next cycle. If our universe is just one cycle at the end of and infinite cycle which we also know is impossible) we could never have had the very low level of entropy that was “put in” at the beginning of our universe.
==============
“What I do know is that your god is based on faith and not anything observable.”
Well, actually that’s not true. I know this is asking a lot from you but if you would care to follow this series, beginning with “There’s zero evidence for creator God” I think you will have something worth thinking about.
I’m probably not going to change your mind, but obviously I think there is enough evidence to come to a place where even Richard Dawkins is saying, "A good case could be made for the existence of a Deistic God.
==============
Even if I accept your notion that the universe has an uncaused cause, who is to say that cause is your particular god?
Yes, well, in philosophy (please forgive me if I’m telling you something you already know) there is a concept known as The Greatest Conceivable Being. This being is what we normally call God. For reasons, again philosophical and metaphysical there can only be one Greatest Conceivable Being. You can probably see this after a bit of thought. If there was something greater than this Being, then that is what we could call The Greatest Conceivable Being, or God. You can call it a Mind or something else. It really doesn’t matter. But God is what this uncaused cause is usually called.
Why do we stop there, as opposed to a lessor god? Because the GCB is the least arbitrary stopping point.
The burden of proof is still on you to demonstrate that a god (however you define that term) created the universe, and that it was itself uncaused.”
Yes, I understand that and again, if you will humour me enough to follow along (it will amount to about 6 posts), well, then I think you'll see that there may be compelling proof or overwhelming proof but there is certainly proof, even as you use the term for giving pause for thought.
I mean, you sound like a reasonable fellow, not one of these that dismisses evidence out of hand simply because it doesn’t agree with your world view.
================
"After all, if the universe had a cause, it does not follow that its cause was uncaused."
Actually, I think it does and I’ll show you in a post or two why I think this very well might be the case.
For now, please forgive me for cutting and pasting an answer that I just gave to someone called Mark.
What created God at first seems like a good question. However let me explain it this way.
. Everything that has a beginning has a cause.
. The universe had a beginning.
. Therefore the beginning of the universe had a cause.
. The universe contains everything that had a beginning, including itself.
That takes care of the question, “Well, if God made the universe, who made God?”
Remember, atheists have no problem with saying that something is infinite, or that it has always existed, or that it’s eternal, as long as that something isn’t Creator God.
However, if God exists, then He exists outside of and prior to the universe.
God is not material. He is Spirit. He does not need a cause. He has always been.
He is infinite.
He is eternal.
Asking, “What caused an infinite or eternal Being to begin?” or, “When did an eternal being begin to exist?” is illogical and incoherent.
Illogical statements are something that atheists usually take great pains to avoid, except when they’re confronted with the reality of Creator God. Then, it seems, all bets are off.
The fact remains, and it remains a fact that is based on what science tells us is true, that everything that begins to exist, including the universe, had its cause from something outside of itself. There are no known exceptions to this observed and consistently verified rule.
Follow-up posts will show why it is that we must choose between matter as infinite and Creator God who is Spirit, as infinite.
Reason states that it must be One and not the other for matter cannot pre-exist itself either physically or chronologically, nor can matter bring itself into existence or create itself. Again, it is impossible for matter to be infinite or to exist from eternity past.
“I reject your theism”
Fair enough. At this point however I’m really only talking about a deistic God. Certainly I believe in a Theistic God but not from the basis of Big Bang etc.
If you want to travel farther with me after this series is done, I could do that.
Post a Comment