No Gods Exist

A. Reasons to Believe in God I want to pick up two observations which I think give us good reason to think there is a God. First, The existence of the universe is better explained by the existence of God. Second, The existence of objective moral values is better explained by the existence of God. The Existence of the Universe is Better Explained by The Existence of God. I will begin by laying out the argument: 1. There are things which come into existence. Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else. There cannot be an infinite series of past causes. Therefore, There exists a first cause which did not come into existence. In other words, The first cause always existed. Let us look at each of the steps in the argument: Premise 1. "There are things which come into existence. " Many things have come into existence. This article is coming into existence as I write it. You came into existence and so did I. This premise is not uncontroversial. Premise 2. "Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else. " It is obvious that Nothing can cause itself to come into existence. Anything that causes itself to come into existence has to exist before it exists. This is impossible. Perhaps something can come into existence from Nothing without any cause whatsoever. Can a thing just pop into existence with absolutely no cause? This also does not seem reasonable. I have three children. If I walk into the dining room and see a picture of Pinky and the Brain which is drawn on the wall in Permanent Magic Marker I will ask "Where did this picture come from? " My daughter Elizabeth (who is almost five) might say "It came from nothing, Dad. Nothing caused it. It just popped there. I think it is quite strange " don"t you? " Will I accept this? No! Things do not come into existence from Nothing without cause. So, We have good reason to think that premise two is true. Everything which comes into existence is caused to exist by something else. Premise 3. "There cannot be an infinite series of past causes. " Is the series of past causes infinite? Can the universe have an infinite past? The answer is that it cannot. First, There are philosophical reasons to think the past cannot be infinite. Second, There are scientific reasons which support this view. Philosophical Reasons Why can"t the past be infinite? The answer is that it is impossible to complete an infinite series by addition. The series of past events is complete. Think of this mathematical fact. Why is it impossible to count to infinity? It is impossible because, No matter how long you count, You will always be at a finite number. It is impossible to complete an actual infinite by successive addition. The past is complete. This claim means that the entire series of past events ends now. It ends today. Tomorrow is not part of the series of past events. The series of past events does not extend into the future. It is complete at the present. If it is impossible to complete an infinite series by successive addition (as it is impossible to count to infinity) the past cannot be infinite. If the past is finite. , That is, If it had a beginning, Then the universe had a beginning. We have strong philosophical reason to reject the claim that the universe has always existed. Scientific Reasons I will not develop these. Rather, I will simply point them out. Big Bang theory does not prove that the universe had a beginning, But it supports this claim. The second law of thermodynamics does not prove that the universe had a beginning but it also supports this claim. We can see that we have good philosophical and Scientific reasons to reject the idea that the Universe has always existed. About the Universe, There are only three alternatives: 1. The universe has always existed. It has an infinite past. 2. The universe was popped into existence from nothing with absolutely no cause. 3. The universe was caused to exist by something outside it. We have strong reason to reject the first two alternatives. Alternative Three is the most reasonable. There was a first cause. This cause existed eternally. It initiated the big bang and created the universe. Now what can we know about this cause? Why think the cause is God? I will briefly sketch a few implications. First, The first cause is not a part of the space-time physical universe because it caused the space time universe to begin. Therefore it is outside of space and time. It is not physical. Second, It has a great deal of power. Third, It is a personal agent. This means it is not an inert force but it must have aspects of person hood; namely, That it wills. How do we know this? This is because it is the best answer to the question of why the Big Bang happened when it did. Why not sooner? Why not later? All of the conditions for producing the Big Bang existed from eternity. The only kind of cause we know of that can initiate an effect when all of the conditions are already present is the will of a personal agent. I have not argued that it is logically impossible that the universe popped into existence from nothing without cause. I have argued that it is more reasonable to hold that it has a cause and that this cause is a non-physical personal agent " God. So it seems that the first argument is fairly strong. The existence of the universe is better explained by the existence of God. The Existence of Objective Moral Values is Better Explained by the Existence of God. People experience a sense of morality that leads them to hold strongly that certain things are right or wrong for all people in all cultures. For example, It is wrong to torture another person just for fun. It is wrong for me today. It is wrong for a citizen of the Philippines and it was wrong for someone living in 500 BC. Our moral sense provides strong reason to believe in a personal God. It will help clarify what I am saying if we put it into the form of an argument. If there is no God, There are no objective moral values. There are moral values which are objective. Therefore, God exists. Before I discuss this argument, I must make it clear that I am not claiming that one must believe in God in order to be moral. I am not claiming that statistically those who believe in God are more moral than those who do not. I am also not claiming that our knowledge of morality depends upon God. This argument is to the effect that objective moral values themselves are foreign to a universe without God. They do not fit. I have briefly presented two arguments for the existence of God. These show that it is more reasonable to believe that God exists than that He does not exist. A. The Existence of the Universe is Better Explained by The Existence of God. B. The Existence of Objective Moral Values is Better Explained by the Existence of God. So we see that some of the things we observe about the natural world ground a strong inference to the claim that God does exist. This gives us reason to consider with renewed openness the possibility that God has entered the space-time universe and revealed Himself through the person and life and death of Jesus of Nazareth. I have not claimed to prove with mathematical certainty that God exists. I have, However, Provided good reasons to think that He does. If someone wishes to argue successfully that God does not exist. He must first, Provide an answer for each of my arguments and second, He must offer arguments that God does not exist. Until He does this, We can conclude that we have good reason to claim that God does exist. B. The definition of God proves that he must be. God: the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being. C: I know Time and Space are there, So they must exist. D. Your question for D asumes that Time and Space exist. Since God is all powerful, He can exist outside of Time and Space Your Turn!