Here are 112 reasons why I think it is rational to believe in God:
http://rolandvb.topcities.com/Weather/weather4.html
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
Historical Accuracy
Many people challenge the validity of the Bible. The Bible discusses many things about God and His nature, so much so that some call it the Word of God. If the Bible is valid then, we can know that God does exist. Now, there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that everything in the Bible is true. But there are plenty of reasons for someone to rationally believe the Bible is true. One of these reasons is the incredible historical accuracy of the text.
The Bible is an incredibly complex work and was written by dozens of different authors over thousands of years. Many ancient texts speak of civilizations and cultures that are long extinct. Of all the ancient texts, however, archeologists and historians have found the Bible to be the most accurate. Here is what the Smithsonian says in regards to the Bible:
“Much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archeological work. For the most part, historical events described took place and the peoples cited really existed. This is not to say that names of all peoples and places mentioned can be identified today, or that every event as reported in the historical books happened exactly as stated.”
There is very little, if any, evidence that the Bible reported things in an inaccurate way. Some of the cultures and events the Bible described have no current evidence of ever existing, but they do not have any evidence against them either. However, as people continue to work through history, they find more and more evidence in favor of the Bible. For instance, for a long time there was no evidence that King David even existed. Then, in 1993, for the first time, proof was found outside the Bible that David was a real person. Before 1993, it would have been convenient for someone to say, “See, there is no evidence of King David, therefore the Bible is bogus.” The problem, however, was not that there was no evidence of David. The problem was that evidence had not been found. But now that it has, we can be sure that David, along with countless other Biblical events and characters, was real.
In the future, I will be posting more examples of the Bible’s historical accuracy. But with so many examples of the Bible being historically accurate, one must consider the possibility of it being true. Obviously, the historical accuracy of the Bible does not prove the Bible to be inerrant, but it certainly helps its chances.
The Bible is an incredibly complex work and was written by dozens of different authors over thousands of years. Many ancient texts speak of civilizations and cultures that are long extinct. Of all the ancient texts, however, archeologists and historians have found the Bible to be the most accurate. Here is what the Smithsonian says in regards to the Bible:
“Much of the Bible, in particular the historical books of the old testament, are as accurate historical documents as any that we have from antiquity and are in fact more accurate than many of the Egyptian, Mesopotamian, or Greek histories. These Biblical records can be and are used as are other ancient documents in archeological work. For the most part, historical events described took place and the peoples cited really existed. This is not to say that names of all peoples and places mentioned can be identified today, or that every event as reported in the historical books happened exactly as stated.”
There is very little, if any, evidence that the Bible reported things in an inaccurate way. Some of the cultures and events the Bible described have no current evidence of ever existing, but they do not have any evidence against them either. However, as people continue to work through history, they find more and more evidence in favor of the Bible. For instance, for a long time there was no evidence that King David even existed. Then, in 1993, for the first time, proof was found outside the Bible that David was a real person. Before 1993, it would have been convenient for someone to say, “See, there is no evidence of King David, therefore the Bible is bogus.” The problem, however, was not that there was no evidence of David. The problem was that evidence had not been found. But now that it has, we can be sure that David, along with countless other Biblical events and characters, was real.
In the future, I will be posting more examples of the Bible’s historical accuracy. But with so many examples of the Bible being historically accurate, one must consider the possibility of it being true. Obviously, the historical accuracy of the Bible does not prove the Bible to be inerrant, but it certainly helps its chances.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Falling Apart
OK so it has been a while since my last post. Apparently getting married and moving into a new place takes a lot of your time. Who knew?
The other day my mom and I were talking and untangling some ropes. These ropes had not moved since we put them there, but they still managed to get themselves tangled. My mom made a comment that was funny, but had a lot of truth to it. She said, "I don't see how anyone can believe in evolution when stuff like this happens all the time." One of the foundational ideas behind evolution is that life is going from a state of disorder (primordial soup) into an ever increasingly better and more organized state (humans and beyond). But, as we experience all the time in life, things are not getting more organized. Ropes get tangled, rooms get messy, cars (even the expensive ones) break down, animals go extinct, people get sick, and the list could go on and get far worse.
So, for evolution to work, it must contradict our experiences all through life. Not just for a short time either, but for the entire history of the planet. Granted, there is growth. All forms of life are weak or small in the beginning, but with time each individual grows and becomes stronger. But the design for this growth is already inside the being at the start. For instance, the entire set of DNA is in the small seed of a great redwood tree, or the characteristics of a human are all prepared to be developed inside an embryo. So, even though their is growth, the organization is already there in the beginning of the being's life. But despite these periods of growth, the story of life is still the same all over the world. It eventually falls apart and dies.
For evolution to work, there must be a multi-billion year history of life becoming somehow more organized. Evolution claims that this organization was done through genetic mutation, and every once and a while that mutation would make the being stronger or "more fit". But how likely are these mutations to happen? As we have all seen in life, things rarely get more organized on their own, and if they do it is for a short time. Even if a positive genetic mutation were to occur, there would be no guarantee that it would be a dominant gene and appear again in the next generation. Billions of years just does not seem long enough to me for so many mutations to happen that will carry on to the next generation. There are countless species in the world. That calls for an insurmountable number of instances where something miraculously became more organized.
To me, it just seems easier and more plausible to say God created it all. When things are left to themselves, they fall apart. Everything we experience in life that has organization has had someone put it together. So why wouldn't life be the same way? It just seems more logical to say that there is a God behind it all.
The other day my mom and I were talking and untangling some ropes. These ropes had not moved since we put them there, but they still managed to get themselves tangled. My mom made a comment that was funny, but had a lot of truth to it. She said, "I don't see how anyone can believe in evolution when stuff like this happens all the time." One of the foundational ideas behind evolution is that life is going from a state of disorder (primordial soup) into an ever increasingly better and more organized state (humans and beyond). But, as we experience all the time in life, things are not getting more organized. Ropes get tangled, rooms get messy, cars (even the expensive ones) break down, animals go extinct, people get sick, and the list could go on and get far worse.
So, for evolution to work, it must contradict our experiences all through life. Not just for a short time either, but for the entire history of the planet. Granted, there is growth. All forms of life are weak or small in the beginning, but with time each individual grows and becomes stronger. But the design for this growth is already inside the being at the start. For instance, the entire set of DNA is in the small seed of a great redwood tree, or the characteristics of a human are all prepared to be developed inside an embryo. So, even though their is growth, the organization is already there in the beginning of the being's life. But despite these periods of growth, the story of life is still the same all over the world. It eventually falls apart and dies.
For evolution to work, there must be a multi-billion year history of life becoming somehow more organized. Evolution claims that this organization was done through genetic mutation, and every once and a while that mutation would make the being stronger or "more fit". But how likely are these mutations to happen? As we have all seen in life, things rarely get more organized on their own, and if they do it is for a short time. Even if a positive genetic mutation were to occur, there would be no guarantee that it would be a dominant gene and appear again in the next generation. Billions of years just does not seem long enough to me for so many mutations to happen that will carry on to the next generation. There are countless species in the world. That calls for an insurmountable number of instances where something miraculously became more organized.
To me, it just seems easier and more plausible to say God created it all. When things are left to themselves, they fall apart. Everything we experience in life that has organization has had someone put it together. So why wouldn't life be the same way? It just seems more logical to say that there is a God behind it all.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The Teleological Argument
The teleological argument, which has also been called the argument from design, is one of my favorites. It was originally set forth by William Paley, a professor at Cambridge in the late eighteenth century. Rather than give the premises and conclusion of the argument, I will tell a short story that demonstrates this argument best.
If you are walking along the beach and find a beautiful golden watch that accurately tells time with an hour, minute, and second hand, where will you think the watch came from? Most likely, you will think that the watch had a maker or designer who put the watch together. Somehow, after making and potentially selling the watch, the watch was lost. Perhaps it fell out of a beach bag, or perhaps it was lost to sea in a ship wreck. Regardless of how the watch got there, it is very likely that the watch had a designer. As big as the ocean is, I doubt anyone would look out to the sea and think to themselves, "this watch must have been tossed around in the sea for years and molded into the perfectly working mechanism it is today." This watch we will call a teleological system. A teleological system is any mechanism that exhibits design.
We can apply the same story to the universe. It has many pieces that work together in incredible fashion. This can be seen on a large scale: The sun rising consistently, the stars rotating according to season, and the tides rising and falling. It can also be seen on a much more minute scale: DNA copying itself, cells joining together to create new life, and the brain sending signals to your foot to get it to move. The world is full of teleological systems, and many systems contain many smaller systems working together seamlessly. If one would assume a simple watch is made by a designer, why would one not think that all of the intricate "machines" in our universe do not also have a designer? Why would one think that a much more difficult system should have come about by random chance? It would seem, then, that there is some good reason to believe in God.
If you are walking along the beach and find a beautiful golden watch that accurately tells time with an hour, minute, and second hand, where will you think the watch came from? Most likely, you will think that the watch had a maker or designer who put the watch together. Somehow, after making and potentially selling the watch, the watch was lost. Perhaps it fell out of a beach bag, or perhaps it was lost to sea in a ship wreck. Regardless of how the watch got there, it is very likely that the watch had a designer. As big as the ocean is, I doubt anyone would look out to the sea and think to themselves, "this watch must have been tossed around in the sea for years and molded into the perfectly working mechanism it is today." This watch we will call a teleological system. A teleological system is any mechanism that exhibits design.
We can apply the same story to the universe. It has many pieces that work together in incredible fashion. This can be seen on a large scale: The sun rising consistently, the stars rotating according to season, and the tides rising and falling. It can also be seen on a much more minute scale: DNA copying itself, cells joining together to create new life, and the brain sending signals to your foot to get it to move. The world is full of teleological systems, and many systems contain many smaller systems working together seamlessly. If one would assume a simple watch is made by a designer, why would one not think that all of the intricate "machines" in our universe do not also have a designer? Why would one think that a much more difficult system should have come about by random chance? It would seem, then, that there is some good reason to believe in God.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
The Israelites out of Egypt
Thousands of years ago the Israelites were slaves in Egypt. They had been slaves for several generations, but they were eventually let go. I am not going to talk about the plagues or the parting of the red sea, but rather the beginning of the Jewish Religion.
The Jewish Law that was written by the Israelites while they were in the desert is one of the most complex religions in history. More importantly, it was one of the first monotheistic religions. It also became the most important and influential belief system in history.
How do those facts work as evidence for God? As I said before, the Israelites were slaves for generations. This means that they were uneducated and living in a very polytheistic country. When they left Egypt, it would have made sense if they began following a religion that was similar to Egypt’s, but they created an entire new one that was totally different from Egypt. The complexity of the religion, and the benefits of following many of the laws in that time, would have been impossible for a small and uneducated society to put together and then follow. But they did, and than their religion survived for thousands of years and changed the world.
The fact that such a small and uneducated society was responsible for the most influential and revolutionary religion in history, a religion that was completely different from that of the Egyptians, suggests that there was probably a divine influence guiding them. For this reason, I think it is rational to believe in God.
The Jewish Law that was written by the Israelites while they were in the desert is one of the most complex religions in history. More importantly, it was one of the first monotheistic religions. It also became the most important and influential belief system in history.
How do those facts work as evidence for God? As I said before, the Israelites were slaves for generations. This means that they were uneducated and living in a very polytheistic country. When they left Egypt, it would have made sense if they began following a religion that was similar to Egypt’s, but they created an entire new one that was totally different from Egypt. The complexity of the religion, and the benefits of following many of the laws in that time, would have been impossible for a small and uneducated society to put together and then follow. But they did, and than their religion survived for thousands of years and changed the world.
The fact that such a small and uneducated society was responsible for the most influential and revolutionary religion in history, a religion that was completely different from that of the Egyptians, suggests that there was probably a divine influence guiding them. For this reason, I think it is rational to believe in God.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Prophecy
The Bible is often referred to as God’s Word. To some, this is a fact that they build their entire lives around. To others, the whole thing seems bogus. But, there are some things about the Bible that seem to be good evidence for having some level of Divine Authorship. Whether you think it is the inerrant word of God or not, it can still be said that if any pieces of it required a divine influence, then God must exist.
Before I get into the main argument, I would like to point something out that is often overlooked. The Bible is an amazing work of literature. It has everything: great poetry, strange and unique stories, incredible use of foreshadowing, very original characters, great ideas about love, and so much more. I think this, in itself, is evidence for God’s existence. The fact that a large number of educated and uneducated people combined to create such an incredible work of literature is worth noting. Simple fishermen wrote the best selling book of all time. It is sometimes hard for me to think they made it all up.
But the main reason I think divine influence can be seen in the Bible is prophecies. There are hundreds of prophecies in the Bible. Many have come true, and some are supposed to happen in the future. Many of these prophecies (around 300) deal with Jesus. Some are quite specific, and some broader, but all of them came true in the person of Jesus. Now, you may argue that much of that is due to chance or a few have been twisted to fit. So let us account for those. Since I am feeling generous, we will suppose that only 8 of those prophecies about Jesus were about him and actually came true. But through modern science of probability, it has been determined that the odds of making 8 prophecies or predictions about a person and all of them coming true is 1 in 10^17 power. Those odds are pretty slim. The following illustration presents a good way of understanding how ridiculous those odds are. If you were to cover the state of Texas with 10^17 silver dollars, they would cover the state and be two feet deep. One of these silver dollars has been painted red, and you get one shot at picking it out with your eyes closed. I doubt that you will find it.
The Prophecies in the Bible often came true. It must be asked, how did someone know what one person would be like 500-1000 years into the future? The only reasonable answer is that God must have been writing through them, because only God would know. We cannot say the texts were changed later, because we have manuscripts of the Old Testament that predate the life of Jesus. If we were to say that the writers of the New Testament made a story up to fit all the prophecies together, we would have to admit that uneducated fishermen were some of the most intelligent men in history and tricked their own nation and the entire Roman Empire. Since this seems extremely unlikely to me, I am left with the conclusion that God helped write the Bible and must, therefore, exist.
Good examples of prophesies in the Bible:
In Isaiah 44 and 45, a prophecy is made that a King named Cyrus (yes, it actually gives his name) will conquer the World and will return the Israelites to their home. Years later, Cyrus of the Persian Empire took over the world and sent the Israelites back to Jerusalem.
Read Psalms 22. You will be very surprised to see how much of it relates and foreshadows Jesus’s crucifixion.
A prediction that Jesus will be born in Bethlehem: "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity" (Micah 5:2).
A prophecy about Jesus being crucified and his nature during the event: “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth“ (Isaiah 53:7).
A prophecy about the Triumphal Entry: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; He is just and endowed with salvation, Humble, and mounted on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9).
Before I get into the main argument, I would like to point something out that is often overlooked. The Bible is an amazing work of literature. It has everything: great poetry, strange and unique stories, incredible use of foreshadowing, very original characters, great ideas about love, and so much more. I think this, in itself, is evidence for God’s existence. The fact that a large number of educated and uneducated people combined to create such an incredible work of literature is worth noting. Simple fishermen wrote the best selling book of all time. It is sometimes hard for me to think they made it all up.
But the main reason I think divine influence can be seen in the Bible is prophecies. There are hundreds of prophecies in the Bible. Many have come true, and some are supposed to happen in the future. Many of these prophecies (around 300) deal with Jesus. Some are quite specific, and some broader, but all of them came true in the person of Jesus. Now, you may argue that much of that is due to chance or a few have been twisted to fit. So let us account for those. Since I am feeling generous, we will suppose that only 8 of those prophecies about Jesus were about him and actually came true. But through modern science of probability, it has been determined that the odds of making 8 prophecies or predictions about a person and all of them coming true is 1 in 10^17 power. Those odds are pretty slim. The following illustration presents a good way of understanding how ridiculous those odds are. If you were to cover the state of Texas with 10^17 silver dollars, they would cover the state and be two feet deep. One of these silver dollars has been painted red, and you get one shot at picking it out with your eyes closed. I doubt that you will find it.
The Prophecies in the Bible often came true. It must be asked, how did someone know what one person would be like 500-1000 years into the future? The only reasonable answer is that God must have been writing through them, because only God would know. We cannot say the texts were changed later, because we have manuscripts of the Old Testament that predate the life of Jesus. If we were to say that the writers of the New Testament made a story up to fit all the prophecies together, we would have to admit that uneducated fishermen were some of the most intelligent men in history and tricked their own nation and the entire Roman Empire. Since this seems extremely unlikely to me, I am left with the conclusion that God helped write the Bible and must, therefore, exist.
Good examples of prophesies in the Bible:
In Isaiah 44 and 45, a prophecy is made that a King named Cyrus (yes, it actually gives his name) will conquer the World and will return the Israelites to their home. Years later, Cyrus of the Persian Empire took over the world and sent the Israelites back to Jerusalem.
Read Psalms 22. You will be very surprised to see how much of it relates and foreshadows Jesus’s crucifixion.
A prediction that Jesus will be born in Bethlehem: "But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, too little to be among the clans of Judah, from you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, from the days of eternity" (Micah 5:2).
A prophecy about Jesus being crucified and his nature during the event: “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He did not open His mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter, and like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, so He did not open His mouth“ (Isaiah 53:7).
A prophecy about the Triumphal Entry: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; He is just and endowed with salvation, Humble, and mounted on a donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9).
Saturday, May 2, 2009
The Ontological Argument
The Ontological Argument was first put forth by St. Anselm in the 11th century. At first glance this argument may seem like it goes in a circle or is self-defining. But after thinking about it in depth, it becomes harder and harder to figure out what is actually wrong with it. The argument has been around for almost 1,000 years and has appeared in various forms. It is still discussed by many modern philosophers, and for some people it just makes sense. Because of this, I think it is worth noting. Sometimes I read it and something clicks and it makes perfect sense, other times I read it and I don’t really get it. Hopefully it will make sense for you.
There are various versions of the argument, but here is the way I best understand it:
Any thing that exists in reality is greater than things that exist only in the mind. For instance, we can imagine a unicorn. Unicorns are pretty cool, but they only exist in the mind or on paper. They do not exist in reality. But if they did, we would say that the real unicorn is a greater being than the unicorn in my coloring book.
We can apply similar logic to God’s existence. If God exists in our minds, he is pretty cool. He is powerful, created the world, and has lived forever. But, a God existing only in our minds is not nearly as great as a God that exists in reality. The following is where the major difference between the unicorn and God examples arises. God is said to be the greatest being we can conceive. He is a being “than which none greater can be conceived.” A unicorn is just a cool combination of animals, but nothing can be greater than God. He is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, and the list goes on.
Since God is a being whom we cannot conceive of anyone greater, we must say he exists. Why? Because if he only exists only in the mind, than he is not the greatest being we can conceive of. All we would have to do is conceive of a God that exists, and He would be greater than the God that exists only in the mind.
We cannot apply the same logic to the unicorn here, because we could easily conceive of something greater than a unicorn. But we cannot conceive of something greater than God, because He is the greatest of all things. Part of our conception of God is that He created the universe. Since He is above all things and the originator of all things, we can safely say that He is the greatest being we can conceive of. And since the greatest being we can conceive of must exist, then God (the greatest being we can conceive) must exist.
There are various versions of the argument, but here is the way I best understand it:
Any thing that exists in reality is greater than things that exist only in the mind. For instance, we can imagine a unicorn. Unicorns are pretty cool, but they only exist in the mind or on paper. They do not exist in reality. But if they did, we would say that the real unicorn is a greater being than the unicorn in my coloring book.
We can apply similar logic to God’s existence. If God exists in our minds, he is pretty cool. He is powerful, created the world, and has lived forever. But, a God existing only in our minds is not nearly as great as a God that exists in reality. The following is where the major difference between the unicorn and God examples arises. God is said to be the greatest being we can conceive. He is a being “than which none greater can be conceived.” A unicorn is just a cool combination of animals, but nothing can be greater than God. He is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, and the list goes on.
Since God is a being whom we cannot conceive of anyone greater, we must say he exists. Why? Because if he only exists only in the mind, than he is not the greatest being we can conceive of. All we would have to do is conceive of a God that exists, and He would be greater than the God that exists only in the mind.
We cannot apply the same logic to the unicorn here, because we could easily conceive of something greater than a unicorn. But we cannot conceive of something greater than God, because He is the greatest of all things. Part of our conception of God is that He created the universe. Since He is above all things and the originator of all things, we can safely say that He is the greatest being we can conceive of. And since the greatest being we can conceive of must exist, then God (the greatest being we can conceive) must exist.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
The Grandeur of the Universe
I have always loved visiting the mountains. They just blow me away. There is nothing better than hiking on a trail, coming around a turn, and being surprised by an amazing scenic outlook. There is something else that happens when I see beautiful mountains: there is a leap in my heart, a sense about the world that there are things far bigger and far greater than me and my small life. I can't help but think that feeling comes from God, and that the grandeur of his Creation is but a small example of his power.
Milford Sound, New Zealand
But the mountains, despite their size and beauty, are but a small taste of the entire universe's grandeur. It is bigger than I can even comprehend and just thinking about the stars and the lengths of the universe blows my mind. I found this video on youtube, and it gives an incredible picture about how large the universe is:
The world is full of incredible things. Some are bigger and more beautiful than any human could have imagined. And it is not just the big things, the tiny and intricate details of cell life and DNA are enough to send my mind spinning. Maybe I am just limited in my understanding, but it would seem unlikely that so many great and beautiful things would just randomly appear. When I look out at the mountains or up at the stars, I cannot get around the belief that God is there and He created it all.
Milford Sound, New Zealand
But the mountains, despite their size and beauty, are but a small taste of the entire universe's grandeur. It is bigger than I can even comprehend and just thinking about the stars and the lengths of the universe blows my mind. I found this video on youtube, and it gives an incredible picture about how large the universe is:
The world is full of incredible things. Some are bigger and more beautiful than any human could have imagined. And it is not just the big things, the tiny and intricate details of cell life and DNA are enough to send my mind spinning. Maybe I am just limited in my understanding, but it would seem unlikely that so many great and beautiful things would just randomly appear. When I look out at the mountains or up at the stars, I cannot get around the belief that God is there and He created it all.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
The Cosmological Argument
The Cosmological Argument has been around for centuries. Some of the more important proponents of it are St. Thomas Aquinas and Samuel Clarke. The essential premise of this argument is that there must be a cause for everything. The world exists, and since the world exists, it had to come from somewhere.
Everything that currently exists has a cause. The causes for things that exist also had a cause before that. And those causes, likewise, had causes of their own. This string of causes could go on and on and on, but eventually, there has to be an original cause. For example: An apple tree was “caused” by a seed. This seed came out of an apple. This apple came from totally different apple tree. This process can be said to have been happening for thousands or even millions of years, but the first seed had to come from somewhere. We can say this about all forms of life and all objects in the universe. Everything that is finite (has a beginning and end) must have some sort of cause.
Since it is unreasonable to say that finite things have always existed, we must determine an original cause. The Cosmological Argument calls for an original cause that is eternal and has always existed and never had, nor needed, a cause of its own. Since it is necessary to have some sort of original cause, it is very likely that some sort of infinite God is the cause of all finite things.
A popular Atheist response to the Cosmological Argument is the Big Bang. This theory states that with a giant flash, the entire universe exploded into being. I think it is important to note that this theory is the best attempt to explain the world without God. The people who created it and hold to it begin by not believing in God, and are trying to find a way to explain the Universe’s origins. While I suppose one could hold to this argument, I just do not see the rational in thinking that gigantic stars, planets, and other things that exist exploded out of nothingness. Another problem with this argument is that if the Universe did begin with an explosion, the Universe should be spreading out at a slower and slower rate. But, the Universe is actually expanding at an accelerated rate, and this makes an explosion at the beginning much less likely.
Either you can believe that all things mysteriously appeared out of a giant explosion (although, one must wonder where the explosion itself came from) or you can believe that there is an infinite God, who has always existed, and who created the world. It seems rational to me, then, to believe in God.
Everything that currently exists has a cause. The causes for things that exist also had a cause before that. And those causes, likewise, had causes of their own. This string of causes could go on and on and on, but eventually, there has to be an original cause. For example: An apple tree was “caused” by a seed. This seed came out of an apple. This apple came from totally different apple tree. This process can be said to have been happening for thousands or even millions of years, but the first seed had to come from somewhere. We can say this about all forms of life and all objects in the universe. Everything that is finite (has a beginning and end) must have some sort of cause.
Since it is unreasonable to say that finite things have always existed, we must determine an original cause. The Cosmological Argument calls for an original cause that is eternal and has always existed and never had, nor needed, a cause of its own. Since it is necessary to have some sort of original cause, it is very likely that some sort of infinite God is the cause of all finite things.
A popular Atheist response to the Cosmological Argument is the Big Bang. This theory states that with a giant flash, the entire universe exploded into being. I think it is important to note that this theory is the best attempt to explain the world without God. The people who created it and hold to it begin by not believing in God, and are trying to find a way to explain the Universe’s origins. While I suppose one could hold to this argument, I just do not see the rational in thinking that gigantic stars, planets, and other things that exist exploded out of nothingness. Another problem with this argument is that if the Universe did begin with an explosion, the Universe should be spreading out at a slower and slower rate. But, the Universe is actually expanding at an accelerated rate, and this makes an explosion at the beginning much less likely.
Either you can believe that all things mysteriously appeared out of a giant explosion (although, one must wonder where the explosion itself came from) or you can believe that there is an infinite God, who has always existed, and who created the world. It seems rational to me, then, to believe in God.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The Beginning
As I have surfed the internet, I have encountered many websites that discuss how irrational it is to believe in God. I tend to think of myself as a pretty rational person, and happen to believe in God as well. So I decided to write a little blog about how one can believe in God and have good reason for doing so. While I do not think the arguments and evidence on this site will convince everyone that God is real, it is my hope that at a minimum it will get people to think that us theists are not total crazies who ignore logic. I also hope that it will open the hearts and minds of all types of people and that some pretty good discussion will happen here. So please, make comments of your thoughts. I welcome criticisms, encouragements, improvements, and personal stories. If you would like to e-mail me something you can do so at notyetbroken@gmail.com.
I hope you enjoy the site!
I hope you enjoy the site!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
