The beginning, what happened in the beginning of, well, everything in existence? Both Christian scientists and Atheist scientists agree, there had to be a beginning. Before that beginning was nothing, if that was not true and there was something before the beginning then that would disqualify it from being the true beginning. If the universe had no beginning then it would be eternal, which breaks the natural law of time and space therefore is supernatural and atheists cannot make such a claim because it would be a direct contradiction to their reasoning to be opposed to the existence of God. So therefore our Atheist friends have a dilemma. If naturally there had to be a beginning, what initiated that beginning? If there was nothing, what caused that nothing to become something if there was nothing to cause that something? Richard Dawkins cannot answer this, Bill Nye the science guy says its a "great mystery" and I agree with them. If we refuse to acknowledge the existence of God then the universe cannot exist. The universe had to have a supernatural beginning period.
This is the reason why Christians have the most logical explanation of origins, its because we have the written account by the one who made everything. Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning GOD created the heavens and the earth". So yes there was a beginning, and God was that something that caused nothing to become everything. God in 6 literal days about 6000 years ago created everything and breathed life into his most wonderful creation, us. But then Atheists chime in the classic "who created God"? The answer is quite simple and I will go into more depth in a future article but basically, the creator is not bound by the rules he specifically made for the creation. For example God created humans with the need to eat and drink for survival, does that mean God needs to drink and eat for survival? Absolutely not, that would be idiotic to believe. But Atheists do just that when they suggest that someone had to create God. Just because we humans have a creator, doesn't mean God had to have a creator. God created humans with a beginning and an end, just like all of his creation, we are bound by time. We are born then we die. God isn't bound by his own rule of time that he created for us. If the Atheists then responds "well that's not logical that God could exist eternally, and have no beginning or end". Well Mr. Atheist that's exactly right. God created logic therefore he is not bound by it, God is supernatural therefore he is not bound by nature, the rules that apply to us do not apply to God.
So there you go folks. Atheists ascribe to a belief system that will forever be unable to answer the question "what happened in the beginning?". That is the moment when us Christians stand tall and proclaim the Word of God. For we have the truth and we must ensure others have it to.
As a Christian apologist myself, I have to point out that the current fad among atheists is in fact to argue for an eternal universe (or some other variation of the 'universe without a beginning' idea).
ReplyDeleteThey don't view this as being supernatural, and have constructed a number of rather abstruse mathematical constructs to justify this idea.
Basically, they contend that there was never 'nothing.'
The classical argument against this has been that Cosmic Inflation is a scientifically verifiable (i.e. measurable) fact, which, if projected backward in time, naturally leads to a singularity - at which point the mathematical basis for physics breaks down.
But various theorists have invented models that avoid this problem in one way or another.
Stephen Hawking theorized that inflation might be described by a formula that, run in reverse, approaches but never quite reaches a singularity - a kind of 'Zeno's paradox' in reverse.
Others have posited alternating cycles of inflation and contraction, an 'oscillating' universe that expands and contracts, but never quite disappears.
Still a third option is provided by the "many universes" theory, according to which universes branch off from one another continually such that each owes its beginning to another.
My response to each of these is to point out that they are, until proven otherwise, only models. Until the atheist can provide strong evidence in support of them, Occam's razor dictates that the simplest (and only verifiable) model - the created, inflationary universe - is most likely the correct one.
The only honest answer to the question is "we don't know yet", to claim otherwise and fill in the answers with "god did it" is frankly pathetic.
ReplyDeleteOccam's razor states that "among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better". Thus the assumption of a god - a supernatural being of VAST complexity whose existence is undetectable - would surely equally be ruled out?
ReplyDelete