Creationism vs. Atheism

I am going to start out by providing a few definitions, after which I will point a flaw in PRO’s argument, which may just be details regarding terminology. Finally, I will attempt to address PRO’s actual argument. First, a Few Definitions Creationism: the belief that all things were created by an intelligent creator [1]. Atheism: the lack of belief in any deities [2]. A Quick Issue Most glaringly, I would like to point out that PRO has set up a false dichotomy between atheism and creationism. For one thing, there are some atheists who are also creationists [3]. Perhaps this is simply an issue to which PRO can bring clarity to with a bit more explanation. The Main Argument PRO’s argument seems to be that since the world is not infinite, that it will end, it follows that it must have had a beginning, and in order to avoid the problem of infinite regress, a God must have been the “source of that which is finite. ” First of all, PRO is unclear regarding what he is claiming to have a beginning. He mentions the planet, rocks, atoms, animals, humans, and molecules. Now, the larger of these items mentioned can be broken down into atoms. We are all basically atoms floating around in various configurations, so I see no reason to address anything other than atoms. It is well understood that the mass of an object is a measure of the energy it contains. This concept is known as mass-energy equivalence, and is represented by what is possibly the most recognizable equation in the world today: E=mc^2, which was developed by Albert Einstein in the early twentieth century [4]. Since matter and energy are basically interchangeable, none of the things PRO mentioned will every truly have an end; they will simply change forms. For instance, when I die, my body will not cease to exist, it will simply change forms. If my wishes are followed, I will be cremated, so some of my body will be released as energy, while the remaining ashes will be handled otherwise. Regardless, nothing was lost, it all just changed forms. So, if PRO’s argument is that everything ends, so it must have had a beginning, therefore, there must have been an ultimate beginning (God), PRO has already failed. The Universe? Now, it is possible, that PRO is actually talking about the universe; claiming that the beginning of the universe required a God to prevent the infinite regress of causes. This is like saying that God caused the Big Bang. However, this argument also fails unless PRO can demonstrate that our universe actually had a beginning. We are pretty sure about the beginning of the universe back to about 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang. Before this, in the time known as the Planck Epoch, we know nothing [5]. Perhaps the stuff that made up the early universe always existed; perhaps it grew out of another universe, or a multiverse. We don’t know, so if PRO is going to claim that the universe had a beginning, he will have to provide some evidence. Wrapping Up Again, I would like to thank PRO for setting up this debate; it looks like it will be enjoyable. I look forward to PRO’s comments in the next round. Sources: [1] . http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] . http://www.merriam-webster.com... [3] . http://www.atheistcreationist.org... [4] . http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] . http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...