Proof Of God

david says:

1. There is an enormous amount of energy locked up in matter in the universe (E=mC2) – an unfathomable amount.

2. Scientists insist energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

Q: Where did this energy come from initially?

A1: The Big Bang. No. An explosion requires energy to initiate it. Whether potential or kinetic.

A2: It was always there. No. The Second Law of Thermodynamics kicks in and the energy must be uniformly distributed throughout the Universe which it is not.

A3: I dont know. Then neither do you know if there is a God or not.

QED. Have a nice day.


14 Responses to Proof Of God

  1. Don Severs says:

    Even if we grant all that, invoking ‘God’ solves nothing. It just moves the problem to how did God come to be? If he is eternal, or can come from nothing, or didn’t need a cause, then perhaps the universe didn’t, either.

    The ‘God’ approach just adds another layer that we then need to explain. There is also no way to say if there is only one ‘God’ (there could be a committee with any number of members), whether that god is wholly natural or supernatural, or whether he is still alive. If something created this universe, it could have died since then.

    Far out? None of these are as unlikely as the gods of the world’s religions.

  2. Kevin G says:

    Obviously that was not a proof of any god since the conclusion was “neither do you know if there is a God or not.”

    Leaving that aside, there is also negative energy content in the universe, mostly in the form of gravitational energy; current research is trying to pinpoint whether the total net energy is positive, zero, or negative, which would correspond to spacetime with negative, zero, or positive curvature (this is also related to the question of “dark energy”). So far, we know the net energy content in the universe is very, very close to zero. If it is zero, then conservation of energy would not have been violated by the appearance of the universe; it went from a zero-energy state to another zero-energy state. Anyway, it is clear that matter has been in our universe as far back as we can see. It doesn’t really make sense to ask what happened much “before” that since “before” refers to order in time and time itself is an aspect of our universe. Current science estimates the universe to be 13.7 billion years old. Matter has been a feature of our universe that entire time, as have the fundamental forces and so on. So in that sense it has “always” been there but since we give a finite lifetime of the universe, in that sense it has not. Incidentally, on the large scale, the universe is remarkably isotropic, but since we don’t claim the universe has existed as it is for an infinitely long time, there’s no reason to demand perfect homogeneity. In fact, the remarkable degree of homogeneity was something of a puzzle to physicists and led to the proposal of the theory of cosmic inflation, which subsumes the Big Bang theory. If you’re interested in the origins of the universe, check out cosmic inflationary theories; I especially like eternal chaotic inflation.

  3. Kevin G says:

    Also, the big bang was not really an explosion. It’s not the interaction energy between the matter that flung it all apart; rather space itself expanded. The entire universe was fantastically hot and dense, so where would the “explosion” have flung things? Space itself expanded, thus reducing the density, thus reducing the temperature. This is not the same thing as an explosion and we can’t apply the same physical reasoning. Instead we have to address the question of the expansion of space itself, and how that is related to energy content of the universe and of the vacuum.

  4. david says:

    “neither do you know if there is a God or not.” isnt my conclusion, it is a preemptive response to possible answer #3. I proposed 3 possible answers and then gave replies beforehand.

    My thrust is: it takes energy to create the Universe so where did this energy come from?

    A zero-energy balance in the Universe doesnt really solve the problem. Energy is still required to kick the whole thing off – like a pebble dropped in a pool that makes waves.

    Genesis talks of a void where God separated light from darkness. “Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” – this takes energy.

    Whether we see God as a singular or collective entity is immaterial. What we are trying to visualize and describe in mere human terms is an existence that is above and beyond that of our own limited existential insight.

    The Bible teaches that we are not just flesh, but spirit and flesh. So in part we should be capable of seeing reality in part – at least.

  5. The Atheist says:

    Hi, david. Even if we will never have the ability to answer the question about where the energy came from (we might be able to – but let’s assume for now that we’ll never know), why is this a reason to assert that God created the universe? The alternative would be to admit that we don’t know how the universe came into existence.

  6. AK in AK says:

    I’ve seen this argument time and time again and it is flawed so badly… but for some reason the people proposing it just seem to overlook the massive flaws. being an atheist does not mean I know the answers to all the universe. that seems to be the expectation though any time the subject is brought up. If we can not answer then we are wrong and god exists… even if we can answer, a more difficult or modified enigma is presented and somehow that proves god exists…

    However, being an atheist, to me, means I am comfortable with the fact that I do not understand how the entire universe works and that I am fascinated by the scientific discoveries we make every week that give us more clues to how things work. I do not need to invent something to explain what I do not know. I can accept the fact that theories, while very complex and based on a lot of evidence, can still be incorrect if the smallest detail turns out to be wrong. this doesn’t prove that a deity exists, it simply proves we don’t have the evidence to derive the correct answer from.

    It could be that we are not evolved far enough yet to be able to properly comprehend the evidence that we do have. With a universe that has existed for billions of years before us it is very likely that we will never fully comprehend what came before us. but none of that proves the existence of a deity.

  7. I don’t know how something works, so Jesus is true!

    These kinds of arguments seek to find a place to insert God. The problem with gaps is they can be filled with many things. Even if we pursue such arguments, all they do is allow the God idea to enter the race. All the heavy lifting of edging out natural explanations, then homing in on a particular god remains. It’s a hollow approach that, even if it worked, would lead to only the thinnest theism.

    Even then, you’d still have to duke it out with all the other religions, as well as all possible theisms that have never been thought of. There is no reason to think that the truth is contained in one of the religions found on Earth. The space of possible theisms is vast, probably infinite.

    It gets worse. Even if you could home in on theism, you’ve only shown that there’s a god. That god could be loving or malignant, all-powerful or weak, eternal or temporal, petty or gracious.

    Hume admitted we can’t ever know whether there is a god. But the important thing is what God’s qualities are. Given the fact of human suffering, there are constraints on God’s character, if he exists. He is weak, evil or absent. Absent is his best option. Anything else places him at the scene of the crime.

  8. ed says:

    dr. kenneth miller-biologist and theist- give the followign example. X belief the moon is made of green cheese and Y claims is made of granite. Then they go to the moon and bring back samples of rock and found after analysis that they were no made of granite. Is that a proof the moon is made of cheese?

  9. ed says:

    And to add a little more. The only way to know what the moon is made-of would be to know what the the actual substance the sample showed. But that is not necessary in order to clearly see that the negation of the granite “theory” is not the affirmative proof of the green cheese “theory”. Is this what a god of the gasp mean?

  10. nightman2112 says:

    um, I feel I should point out that you contradict one of the premises of your proof. You correctly point out that matter is neither created nor destroyed. You then ask “so where did it all come from?” If matter is neither created nor destroyed, is “where did it all come from” an appropriate question to be asking?

  11. The universe is the question – existence or non-existence. If the universe and everything in it didn’t exist, then there’s no question of existence. But non-existence has no meaning without existence – so both must occur and not occur.

  12. alanschuyler says:

    When we didn’t know how an eclipse occurred it was “God”. When we didn’t understand bacteria that caused disease, it was “God”. The more we understand of the workings of the universe, the smaller the role of “God”.

  13. beany says:

    there is no such thing as proof that God really exists. You either believe in God based on pure faith, or not at all. One argument which is listed as ‘proof’ that God exists is ” look at all the beauty of creation, the complexity of life’s workings, the awe of the universe, which all points to a creator” – this is not PROOF. Creation would still be beautiful, life would still be precious, the universe would still be awesome with or without God. I can’t understand why God does not announce himself and take away peoples doubts of his existence. Why is ‘faith’ so much more important than ‘fact

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: