Difference between revisions of "Genesis 1:1"

From Errancy Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(→‎Neutral: Response to objections.)
Line 55: Line 55:
  
 
==Neutral==
 
==Neutral==
 +
One error in the Con argument is that not all atheists hold the universe to be eternal.  Another error is that some theists hold the universe to be eternal (such as Aristotle and some Indian philosophers). --[[User:Peter Kirby|Peter Kirby]] 18:22, 27 Aug 2005 (CDT)
 +
 
The problem with the Con argument is that the existence of the Universe cannot be stated to be a "necessary" result of the existence of God without relying on ''a priori'' assumptions. Con takes the existence of the Universe as proof of the existence of God, but does not establish ''why'' this should be so.
 
The problem with the Con argument is that the existence of the Universe cannot be stated to be a "necessary" result of the existence of God without relying on ''a priori'' assumptions. Con takes the existence of the Universe as proof of the existence of God, but does not establish ''why'' this should be so.
  

Revision as of 23:22, 27 August 2005

Previous Verse < Genesis 1 > Next Verse

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (ASV)

Pro

Big Bang Theory, which is the only credible position on the development of the structures of matter we observe today, demonstrates a number of facts that gravely contradict the belief in divine creation :

  • Space and time are part of a unified whole, something which people living thousands of years ago wouldn't have known. If God created spacetime, then it would have no time in which to act. Theologian William Craig argues that God existed timelessly before Creation, and within time after Creation, but this only brings up a host of new problems.
  • The Big Bang singularity is fundamentally unpredictable, contradicting the belief in a planned universe.
  • The Hartle-Hawking model proves that the ante facto unconditional probability of the universe existing as it is is less than 1, contradicting the belief in a designed universe.

Furthermore, the belief in divine creation breaks basic logic, in demanding us to believe that everything came out of nothing.



Con

Argument from philosophy

CONTRA ERROR:


There are only two major options:

1. God has always existed, and the universe has NOT always existed.

2. The universe has always existed, and God has NOT always existed.


Theists generally hold to the first option, atheists to the second. Atheists usually affirm that not only has God NOT always existed.... He simply has never existed AT ALL.

However, the Big Bang theory supports the idea that the universe had a beginning, and thus backs up the Theist claim.

If someone says, "The Big Bang was the origin of the universe," I simply ask, "What caused the Big Bang." The obvious answer is that God caused the Big Bang.

If an atheist says, "God didn't cause the Big Bang. Rather, material warping in from other parallel universes are what caused the Big Bang...." They may feel they have sidestepped the problem. But then I simply ask, "What caused the origin of all these various other parallel universes" and we are back to square one.

Einstein informed us that time and space are inter-related. Thus, for time to exist, space must also exist. Also, for space to exist, time must exist as well. Space and Time go hand in hand.... you cannot have one without the other.

There is a BIG problem with the idea that the universe that has always existed. Here is the problem, in the form of a logical IF/THEN clause:

IF the universe had always been in existence, THEN an infinite stretch of time would extend backwards into the eternal past. Since it is impossible to traverse an infinite length of time, this means that we could NEVER have arrived yet at the present moment.

Thus, since we actually HAVE arrived at the present moment, THIS MEANS the universe did NOT have to traverse an infinite length of time to get here. Therefore, the universe has NOT always existed, ergo, the universe had a beginning, ergo, God exists.

This problem with traversing an infinite stretch of time applies to the universe. However, since God is neither spatial NOR temporal, this same problem does NOT apply to God. God resides NEITHER in space NOR in time, and therefore He could quite easily have always existed, outside of time. Therefore, the Atheist position is false.

Argument from Literature

While the Pro argument definitely gives reason to doubt a literalist interpretation, it must be realized that--just as the map is not the terrain--the interpretation is not the text. True, there are those who state that the Genesis account should be taken as a word-for-word account of the Creation, these are the minority--the majority even of Judeo-Christian believers take this passage as figurative or mythic.

--JustinEiler 10:06, 27 Aug 2005 (CDT)

Neutral

One error in the Con argument is that not all atheists hold the universe to be eternal. Another error is that some theists hold the universe to be eternal (such as Aristotle and some Indian philosophers). --Peter Kirby 18:22, 27 Aug 2005 (CDT)

The problem with the Con argument is that the existence of the Universe cannot be stated to be a "necessary" result of the existence of God without relying on a priori assumptions. Con takes the existence of the Universe as proof of the existence of God, but does not establish why this should be so.

I'm truly of the opinion that the Con proponent has an insufficient understanding of atheism and functional naturalism, and is conflating the two unnecessarily. This argument may have merit (once it is fully developed), but as it stands only works within the views of one who has already ascribed to the existence of God.

If the person who made the Con argument would care to expand on their reasoning for why the only two options both involve the existence of God, this may clarify the seeming confusion.

--JustinEiler 18:04, 26 Aug 2005 (CDT)

1. Scientifically speaking, the question "what caused the Big Bang is meaningless" - just like a Christian would find the question "what caused God" meaningless. The difference is that God does not exist, and the universe does. There is only matter and energy in motion.

  • Actually, that's not correct: there is an incredible amount of work and speculation into what caused the Big Bang, and what conditions were like before that time. See the Wikipedia article on the Big Bang for more information.
--JustinEiler 10:12, 27 Aug 2005 (CDT)

2. The fact that space and time are aspects of the same thing is, as I pointed out in the Pro, a major problem with divine creation. I don't think whoever wrote the Con position understands the principle here : an action requires time, and Creation is supposed to have created both space and time, therefore the whole construct is circular. How can any Christian argue with that, except to reject modern physics wholesale ? Franc28 23:25, 26 Aug 2005 (CDT)

  • Again, you make the unwarranted (and quite incorrect) assumption that all Christians adhere to a literalist interpretation.
--JustinEiler 10:12, 27 Aug 2005 (CDT)

External links