THE FACT OF GOD
THE FACT OF GOD
(An excerpt from THE BIBLE HAS THE ANSWER (3RD EDITION), by Henry M. Morris and Martin E. Clark, Creation-Life Publishers Inc., 1987, pp. 14-16)
The very essence of the scientific method, in common with all human experience, involves the basic principle of Cause-and-Effect. That is, no effect can be greater than its cause. “From nothing, nothing comes!” There must therefore be a First Cause of all things which has at the very least all the characteristics which are seen in the universe which has been produced by it.
Thus, the First Cause must have intelligence, because there are intelligent beings in the universe, and the universe itself is intelligible, capable of being studied and described intelligently. It is an “effect” which must have an adequate “cause,” and such a cause must therefore have intelligence in such high degree as to practically be called “omniscient” (all-knowing).
Similarly, the First Cause must have emotional attributes, since such things as emotions are surely present in the world. The highest and noblest emotion, most men would agree, is that of love, and thus the Cause of love must itself be One who possesses love in a very high degree.
Furthermore, the attribute of “will”, or volition, is very prominent among men and, since it did not produce itself, the great First Cause must also possess sovereign will.
Then there are tremendous reservoirs of power and energy in the universe, spread over innumerable suns and inconceivable distances,and the original Cause of such vast sources of power must itself have even more power and therefore be, as far as we can judge, omnipotent (all-powerful). Since space and time and also real “effects”, and since our scientific studies have been unable to place finite limits on either space or time, their original Cause surely must be both omni-present and eternal as well.
Finally, since moral and spiritual realities are not self-produced and since all men are aware of such entities, it is certain that the First Cause must be both moral and spiritual in an exceedingly high degree. Furthermore, although we may not understand just how “evil” could be permitted in a moral universe, it is surely significant that men everywhere recognize that “good” is better than “bad”, and that “right” is better than “wrong.” They intuitively know there is a difference between right and wrong, even though they may not always agree as to the precise definitions thereof.
This moral consciousness can be explained only in terms of a great First Cause with a moral consciousness.
Thus, merely by application of the basic scientific law of Cause and Effect, we can deduce that the First Cause must almost certainly be One who is eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, volitional, loving and righteous. The Cause is therefore a great Person, and is exactly such a person as the God revealed in the Bible, the One who created and upholds all things, and to whom every man must account in the Last Day.
Some would claim that there was no First Cause – that the universe never had a beginning. But this is precluded by the Two Laws of Thermodynamics, which are the most basic and best-proved of all scientific laws and which control all known events and processes in the universe.
The First Law is that of Conservation of Mass-Energy, and it assures us that the universe is not creating itself, since nothing can ever be truly created by conservative, non-creative processes.
The Second Law is that of Increasing Disorder, and it says that the universe is running down and wearing out. All processes tend toward a state of decay and ultimate death. Eventually, if present processes continue, the universe will die. And, since it has not yet died, it cannot be infinitely old and must have had a beginning at some time in the past.
The universe is not creating itself in the present, but must have been created in the past by a great First Cause, and that Cause must have been a Person! This is the most reasonable possible conclusion of true science and of all knowledge and experience.
Therefore, men who reject or ignore God do so, not because science or reason require them to, but purely and simply because they want to! As the Scripture says, “They did not like to retain God in their knowledge” (Romans 1:28). “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like unto corruptible man” (Romans 1: 22,23).
For those who really desire to know God, however, He has revealed Himself perfectly through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him” (John 1:18). Jesus Christ is God incarnate - the God-man. The perfection of His life and teachings, His atoning death, the certainty of His bodily resurrection, and the glorious like imparted to each one who receives Him by faith as Lord and Savior, all unite in a perfect testimony to the reality of the true God.
* This is an except from book, THE BIBLE HAS THE ANSWER (3RD EDITION), by Henry M. Morris and Martin E. Clark, Creation-Life Publishers Inc., 1987, pp. 14-16
5 Replies
A few issues:
1. The argument that everything has a cause is not a scientifically valid one. There are events without causes. Radioactive decay is a good example. Why does this particular atom of uranium in a large sample decay at a given time? Why not some other atom or some other time? There is no answer — it is completely random.
2. The argument from energy conservation is irrelevant. It is based on a misunderstanding of modern cosmology, namely that the Big Bang is a creation event. That is not the case in current cosmology. There was a “before” that existed prior to the Big Bang. The Big Bang is understood as a transition from a state where the universe was inflating due to the presence of an “inflation field” to the state we now observe. The energy of the inflation field was converted to radiation, but energy still was conserved. It is unknown what there was prior to inflation, but it is entirely possible that the inflation field had always existed.
3. The conclusion that the Christian god must be the “first cause” is obviously unsupported by the argument from causation
A few issues:
1. The argument that everything has a cause is not a scientifically valid one. There are events without causes. Radioactive decay is a good example. Why does this particular atom of uranium in a large sample decay at a given time? Why not some other atom or some other time? There is no answer — it is completely random.
To say that an event was random does not necessarily imply that the event was causeless.
https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/random
random
adjective as in haphazard, chance
Synonyms
Strongest matches
accidental
aimless
arbitrary
incidental
indiscriminate
irregular
odd
unplanned
Weak matches
adventitious
by-the-way
casual
contingent
designless
desultory
driftless
fluky
fortuitous
hit-or-miss
objectless
promiscuous
purposeless
slapdash
spot
stray
unaimed
unconsidered
unpremeditated
Note well that neither causeless nor uncaused is on either list.
Just sayin'! 😀
Suppose I close my eyes and pull a playing card "at random" out of a full 52-card deck. Say I "choose" the five of clubs. Most certainly the specific card I "chose" (the five of clubs) was not chosen deliberately (i.e. I chose it randomly) , but I don't think anyone would say that my process of my picking the card was per se causeless or uncaused.
To say that an event was random does not necessarily imply that the event was causeless.https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/randomrandomadjective as in haphazard, chanceSynonymsStrongest matchesaccidentalaimlessarbitraryincidentalindiscriminateirregularoddunplannedWeak matches
It’s probably not worth belaboring because the whole “first cause” argument is so weak anyway. However in science, causality implies an interaction between the cause and the effect that is caused. This in turn implies an energy transfer between the causing system and the affected one. When you chose a card from the deck, you applied a force to the deck in a certain way so as to remove a card. You interacted with the deck. You transferred energy to it. Unquestionably you caused a card to be removed from it.
The situation with a uranium atom undergoing decay is completely different. Even in a universe where the only thing present is a lone uranium atom, that atom will decay with a certain probability at any given moment. There is no outside impetus that causes the atom to decay — it does so regardless of anything in its environment. There is no entity or system that you can attribute as a cause of that decay. This is not limited to radioactive decay, BTW. All quantum entities undergo fluctuations. There is no entity or system that you can point to and say that caused the fluctuation. It’s not a matter of just them being random (which they are), but of the fact that there is no external input necessary for them to occur.
BTW, this also relates directly to my third objection. A “first cause” needs only to be an event that occurs without the necessity of any outside system influencing it. Fluctuations of a quantum field (such as the inflation field, leading to the Big Bang for example) would be sufficient as a first cause. There is no necessity for even an intelligent being, let alone a deity, to provide that first cause. Of course, even if a deity were needed, that would not imply that the deity in question actually was the Christian one. Zeus, Odin, Vishnu and countless others would all suffice.
THE FACT OF GOD (An excerpt from THE BIBLE HAS THE ANSWER (3RD EDITION), by Henry M. Morris and Martin E. Clark, Creation-Life Publishers Inc., 1987, pp. 14-16)The very essence of the scientific method, in common with all human experience, involves the basic principle of Cause-and-Effect. That is, no effect can be greater than its cause. “From nothing, nothing comes!&#
Or everything always existed and the universe is eternal.
Thus, the First Cause must have intelligence, because there are intelligent beings in the universe, and the universe itself is intelligible, capable of being studied and described intelligently. It is an “effect” which must have an adequate “cause,” and such a cause must therefore have intelligence in such high degree as to practically be called “
This is a mere assertion without any supporting evidence. Evolutionary science has robust explanations for how intelligence evolved in animals and how it works biologically.
Similarly, the First Cause must have emotional attributes, since such things as emotions are surely present in the world. The highest and noblest emotion, most men would agree, is that of love, and thus the Cause of love must itself be One who possesses love in a very high degree.
Love is one of many emotions that science explains through the brains physical electro-chemistry. Since this book was written we’ve mapped many of the emotions to specific neurotransmitters and hormones, can directly induce these feelings by altering brain chemistry and view them in real time with MRIs.
Furthermore, the attribute of “will”, or volition, is very prominent among men and, since it did not produce itself, the great First Cause must also possess sovereign will.
So this has already run way off the rails. There is no demonstration that a first mover is even necessary, no demonstration that if there is a first mover that its intelligent, so will is just a naked claim at the end of a row of failed claims like dominos.
Then there are tremendous reservoirs of power and energy in the universe, spread over innumerable suns and inconceivable distances,and the original Cause of such vast sources of power must itself have even more power and therefore be, as far as we can judge, omnipotent (all-powerful). Since space and time and also real “effects”, and since our scientific studies h
Interesting that you can accept an eternal creator but not an eternal universe. An eternal universe is essentially the default position, as we have no evidence matter can be created or destroyed. Positing a cause and creator is several steps we have no support for.
Finally, since moral and spiritual realities are not self-produced and since all men are aware of such entities, it is certain that the First Cause must be both moral and spiritual in an exceedingly high degree. Furthermore, although we may not understand just how “evil” could be permitted in a moral universe, it is surely significant that men everywhere recognize
Again evolutionary science has strong explanations for morality being an evolutionary adaptation of our brains. First, we wouldn’t be here if we hadn’t evolved as a social species. We must have strong instincts to cooperate with each other in order to benefit from shared efforts, such as building large agricultural efforts such as aqueducts, and large farms that require group efforts to plant and harvest, for one example. To cooperate socially we all need empathy, a sense of fairness, and the desire to contribute to the greater good, even sometimes at our personal expense.
Our closest living relatives, the great apes all evidence similarly strong moral frameworks. Studies demonstrate fairness and justice see important to them. And even rats have been shown to be strongly emphatic to other rats.
Thus, merely by application of the basic scientific law of Cause and Effect, we can deduce that the First Cause must almost certainly be One who is eternal, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, volitional, loving and righteous. The Cause is therefore a great Person, and is exactly such a person as the God revealed in the Bible, the One who created and upholds all things, and
Again, built on a series of unproven assertions starting with a failed assertion that the universe requires a first mover. Even worse, the Old Testament repeatedly demonstrates that the God of the Bible is not omniscient or omnipresent. And has many instances where he’s not loving, or just. Must specifically an entity that demands to judge you for sins based on rules he made up, with an eternal punishment he devices for even merely not believing without evidence, is clearly not loving or righteous.
Some would claim that there was no First Cause – that the universe never had a beginning. But this is precluded by the Two Laws of Thermodynamics, which are the most basic and best-proved of all scientific laws and which control all known events and processes in the universe.The First Law is that of Conservation of Mass-Energy, and it assures us that the universe is no
If the universe is eternal and not created, it doesn’t violate anything about the first law of thermodynamics, since it’s just eternally conserving mas and energy.
The Second Law is that of Increasing Disorder, and it says that the universe is running down and wearing out. All processes tend toward a state of decay and ultimate death. Eventually, if present processes continue, the universe will die. And, since it has not yet died, it cannot be infinitely old and must have had a beginning at some time in the past.
The universe could easily collapse on itself and restore entropy to the starting point to expand afsin with fresh entropy. It it can be cycling through a variety of forms and the heat death is merely a step along the way to a new one.
The universe is not creating itself in the present, but must have been created in the past by a great First Cause, and that Cause must have been a Person! This is the most reasonable possible conclusion of true science and of all knowledge and experience.
Who created this person? It’s logically unsound to posit an eternal agent (person) without evidence, when an eternal universe matches observations and is the far more parsimonious explanation.
Therefore, men who reject or ignore God do so, not because science or reason require them to, but purely and simply because they want to! As the Scripture says, “They did not like to retain God in their knowledge” (Romans 1:28). “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like unto
The people who wrote the New Testament were desperate to indoctrinate followers with ridiculous screeds against those who actually think about and question their dogma, to try to keep their flocks compliant and pliable. Again, what evidence is there that any New Testament spiritual claims arc even true?
For those who really desire to know God, however, He has revealed Himself perfectly through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him” (John 1:18). Jesus Christ is God incarnate - the God-man. The perfection of His life and teachings, His atoning death, the cer
How would John know any of this was true? The anonymous author, like Paul, almost certainly never met Jesus or witnessed any of Jesus’s claimed supernatural acts. John was written almost 60 years later. So once again, why should we believe any of their claims? And if we believe the gospel writers why should we not believe Mohammed, Joseph Smith and the claims of Marduk, given they all share the same types of “evidence”?
Doesn't it boil down to: "Maybe there was a first cause and maybe there wasn't, and we sure as hell don't know that first cause was if there was one."
Since we have defined energy as eternal, the "what started the universe?" angle seems a wild goose chase.
