The Existence of God

Welcome to debate.org. I will do my best to give you a good debate. Pro clarified that the resolution is "There must be a god that created the universe." Pro bears the burden of proof. He must show that there is no possible alternative for the creation of the universe. I intend to show that there are several possible alternatives. One alternative is that the universe always existed. This is the explanation that is preferred by Western thinkers such as Bertrand Russell and H.G. Wells, and by Eastern religions including Buddhism: "In the eyes of the Buddha, the world is nothing but Samsara -- the cycle of repeated births and deaths. To Him, the beginning of the world and the end of the world is within this Samsara. Since elements and energies are relative and inter-dependent, it is meaningless to single out anything as the beginning. Whatever speculation we make regarding the origin of the world, there is no absolute truth in our notion. " http://www.buddhanet.net... Hinduism: "According to Hindu Philosophy, the universe (or multiverse) never came to be at some particular point, but always has been, always will be, but is perpetually in flux. Space and time are of cyclical nature. This universe is simply the current one, which is influx and constantly changing, when it finally ceases to manifest, a new one will arise." http://en.wikipedia.org... Jainism: "Jainism believes in a cyclical nature of the universe. Jains believe in a universe without beginning, end or creator, hence Jains will refer to the present cycle of the cosmos." http://www.jainuniversity.org... The point of citing these enduring beliefs is not that they are authoritatively true, but rather that they are readily conceivable. Some argue that that it is obvious that everything has a beginning, and inconceivable that something always existed. Clearly that is not true, because hundreds of millions of people have no difficulty postulating a universe that has always existed. Modern science has reached no conclusion as to whether the universe always existed or not. The Big Bang Theory is now well accepted as the start of the universe that is now visible, but there is no consensus theory as to what preceded the Big Bang. One theory is that of quantum fluctuation: "Cosmologists say that a quantum fluctuation gave rise to the Big Bang. And the thing about quantum fluctuations is that they can happen anywhere, any time. And if our universe was born out of a quantum . . . There's a reason some theorists want other universes to exist: They believe it's the only way to explain why our own universe, whose physical laws are just right to allow life, happens to exist. According to the so-called anthropic principle, there are perhaps an infinite number of universes, each with its own set of physical laws. And one of them happens to be ours. That's much easier to believe, say the anthropic advocates, than a single universe "fine-tuned" for our existence." http://www.space.com... Science has taken us far enough to know that our concepts of space and time developed in the everyday world break down in the extremes. For example, there is nothing in our everyday existence that allows us to understand that the speed of light cannot be exceeded or that gravity distorts space. Current cosmology postulates that as the universe expands new vacuum is created and the new vacuum possesses energy that is detectable by its gravitational field. The whole concept of "new vacuum" is inconceivable in our ordinary experience; there is nothing in a vacuum, so how can there be any expanding vacuum? Even though we cannot hold the concept in our minds, the equations indicate that is the case, or at least that it might be the case. Thus is may be that we currently do not have the conceptual apparatus to understand the true origins of the universe. Perhaps it can be explained as a mathematical theory, or perhaps it is unknowable to humans. Whatever the problems with explaining the origins of the universe, the problems are greater explaining the origins of God. God is far more complex and mysterious than the universe. It must be so for God to have created the universe. Therefore, if God always existed or somehow transcends space and time, it is simpler to suppose that the universe always existed or somehow transcends space and time. If God arose spontaneously, then it is simpler to suppose that the universe arose spontaneously. A postulated God makes the problem of origins worse. If one says, "We just do not know the origins of God and are in no position to speculate," then we might as well say the same thing about the origins of the universe. God is not a simpler explanation. Consider the problem of forecasting the paths of hurricanes. Our very best science, despite complexities modeled in our largest computers, does not do a very good job of forecasting hurricane tracks. So why don't we postulate the existence of a hurricane God that guides hurricanes according to the God's wishes? The hurricane God is easier to understand and the hypothesis agrees with everything that happens to hurricanes. If one thinks carefully about the hurricane God, one first realizes that it really isn't simpler. We have to explain how the God came into being, how it got its powers, and how it interacts with the observable world. Second, we realize it isn't a useful explanation. It tells us nothing about how future hurricanes will behave. An explanation with no predictive power, in fact, is really not an explanation at all. For these reasons, the resolution is negated.