How Do We Explain The Existence Of God?

Seeking-to-Know-the-Secrets-of-the-Universe

If you would, imagine that I am God . . . and I hold the Universe in my hands. Picture a shoe box, but it’s the Universe… OK? All space, all time, all matter is in the box: the universe. I AM not in the box, but holding the box…

Now, let me tell you about the universe—the box in my hands: Recent estimates are that the universe is 156 billion light years across. That is, if the universe were not still expanding, it would take light 156 billion years to go from one side to the other. Scientists tell us that we can only see 14 billion light years away, because the universe began 14 billion years ago. That is, we can’t even see the vast majority of the universe, for the light hasn’t even reached us yet.

The Rosette Nebula (NGC 2237, Caldwell 49) in the constellation of Monoceros, HST image

• The universe is 156 billion light years across.
• Our solar system is .00126 light years across (the orbit of Pluto).
• Our solar system is 7.5 trillion miles across.
• So our solar system is 117.5 quadrillion times smaller in width than our universe.

If the entire universe were the size of planet Earth, our solar system would be about 1/70,000 of an inch wide. It would be about 1/6 as wide as a small bacteria.
The solar system: 7.5 trillion miles across, as wide as 1/6 of a small bacteria, if the universe is scaled down to just the size of the earth. But I’m asking you to imagine the universe in this box. Got it?

Now imagine that a man in the utterly miniscule speck that is our solar system, on the unimaginably miniscule speck that is our planet, in one particular spot, at one particular time, examines some clam fossils. He is a specialist in fossilized cretaceous mollusks. Then based on what he “empirically” and “objectively” observes, he writes a book stating, “There is no God,” that is, there is no one holding the box.

So, all the modern, technologically advanced, scientific people say, “Well, he is an expert . . . so that must be truth.”

That’s absurd, isn’t it? It’s absurd because some questions are way too big for any specialist. Yet some specialist invariably says, “We’ve examined the clam fossils and have concluded that there is no God.”

So what do we Christians do? We call in our own specialists who go out to the same spot and analyze the same clam fossils and say, “There’s a lack of transitional forms in the clam sequence; therefore, God exists. Someone’s holding the box.” Then all of us modern, technologically advanced, religious people say, “There is a God because our specialists say so . . . our scientists have concluded: God Exists!”

In the words of C. S. Lewis:

“The statement that there is [a God] and the statement that there is no [God] are neither of them statements that science can make. And real scientists do not usually make them. It is usually the journalists and popular novelists who have picked up a few odds and ends of half-baked science from textbooks who go in for them. After all, it is really a matter of common sense. Supposing science ever became complete so that it knew every single thing in the whole universe. Is it not plain that the questions, “Why is there a universe?” “Why does it go on as it does?” “Has it any meaning?” would remain just as they were?”

… I heard that Einstein once asked his class, “How much of the universe do you suppose we comprehend?” Someone said, “Five percent.” Einstein said, “I think that’s way too much, but even so, who’s to say God couldn’t exist somewhere in the other 95%?” Well, Christians don’t even believe He’s an object in the other 95%. They believe He’s outside the universe; outside of space and time; outside the box, holding the box. He’s the Creator of the box. Why would we even expect him to be a thing in the box that He created?

… God is not an “object” of scientific observation in this world.

Even if you understood every individual part of a Ford motor car, took it apart and analyzed each piece, you still wouldn’t find Henry Ford. And the car would no longer run. You would’ve dissected it. Yet a whole Ford motor car is a beautiful testimony to a person named Henry Ford.

God may not be a thing in His world,
yet the whole thing can bear testimony to its maker.

– Peter Hiett,
The History of Time

The Business of Science

huge.0.1319

When people demand that I “scientifically prove”
the existence of God, they reveal themselves as being
ignorant of both theology and science. As Sean Carroll,
physicist and atheist activist, has said “Science isn’t in
the business of proving things”.

– Sy Garte,
Ph.D, Biochemistry. Biologist. Former atheist, now Christian.

Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?

Why is there something

Leibniz’ Contingency Argument

by Clayton Kraby

“The first question that should rightly be asked is, ‘Why is there something rather than nothing?’” This is the question Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) posed in regards to the origin of the universe as a part of his argument for the existence of God.

Here is a brief and simplified explanation of what has come to be known as the Leibniz Contingency Argument, or the Leibniz Cosmological Argument (cosmology being the study of the origin of the cosmos, or universe).

The logic of the argument goes like this:

1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence.

2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.

3. The universe exists.

4. Therefore, the explanation of the universe’s existence is God.

As with all such logical arguments, if the premises are true (points 1-3), then the conclusion must be true (point 4). The question is whether or not the first three points or more likely to be true than they are false.

Certainly, everyone would agree that the universe exists, so at least we are safe with point number 3.

But what about points 1 and 2? Is it accurate to say that everything that exists has an explanation for its existence and that the sole explanation for the existence of the universe is God?

Premise 1: Everything that exists has an explanation for its existence

In our everyday experiences, we expect there to be an explanation for the things we encounter. Common illustrations of this given are wandering in the woods and discovering a pocket watch.

We would not be intellectually satisfied with saying that the pocket watch is just there. We would explain its existence by concluding that it was left there by someone…

To read the rest of the article, click on the link below:

https://reasonabletheology.org/why-is-there-something-rather-than-nothing-leibniz-contingency-argument/

 

An Escape Mechanism

escape

The new Atheists quote Sigmund Freud, that God is a ‘wish fulfillment; a fictional father figure projected in the sky of our imagination and created by our desire for security.’ On this view, Heaven is an imaginary projection of our extinction and death. And religion is simply a psychological escape mechanism so that we don’t have to face life as it really is. Well, of course, that’s all true; provided only that God does not exist. But if God does exist, exactly the same Freudian argument will show you equally convincingly that it is atheism that is the flight from reality. A projection of the desire not to have to meet God one day and give account for your life. If God does exist, then atheism can easily be seen as a psychological escape mechanism; to avoid taking responsibility for one’s life.

–John Lennox