Your cart is currently empty!
TLblog- The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Part 1- Scientific Observations) by Rand Wagner
Preliminary thoughts: *Something cannot come from nothing- Nothing is nothing, nothing can do nothing, therefore nothing can cause nothing. *Every effect or anything that comes into being, needs a cause. Something cannot come from nothing. *Two possibilities- 1. The universe has always been here. 2. The universe had a beginning. *Did the universe have a beginning and if so, what caused it?
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause; 2. The universe began to exist; 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
The critical step in this argument is demonstrating the reality of the universe’s beginning. Lets consider four lines of argumentation to show that the universe had a beginning- two scientific and two philosophical.
Argument from Science #1
Evidence from the isotropic expansion of the universe (Big Bang Theory). Current scientific observation shaows that the universe is expanding and becoming less and less dense. The implication is that as one extrapolates back in time the universe becomes progressively denser until one arrives at a state called a singularity. this singularity also know as the Big Bang is when space and time came into existence. Stephen Hawking writes, “Almost everyone now believes that the universe, and time itself, had a beginning at the Big Bang. Atheist astronomer Fred Hoyle, agrees that the Big Bang theory requires the creation of the universe from nothing. This is because, as you go backin time, you reach a point at which in Hoyle’s words, the universe was “shrunk down to nothing at all.” Atheist Anthony Kenny of Oxford University says, “A proponent of the Big Bang theory, at leat if he is an atheist, must believe that…the universe came by nothing and from nothing.”
1. NASA- “The universe was created sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter in all directions.”
2. UC Berkley- “The big Bang theory states that at some time in the distant past there was nothing. A process known as vaccuum fluctuation created what astrophysicists call a singularity. From that singularity, which was about the size of adime, our universe was born.”
3. University of Michigan- “About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expension of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event, all matter and energy of space was contained at one point. What existed prior to this event is completely unkown and is a matter of pure speculation. This occurrence was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other.”
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science- The theory holds that a “big bang” precipitated a huge split second inflation of the universe, followed by a gradual expansion that continues to this day and is now accelerating.”
The scientific community (some theists and some atheists) recognizes the Big Bang theory as the most accurate theory regarding the origin of the universe. One question- How did nothing explode?
Argument from Science #2
This argument is based on the Thermodynamic properties of the universe. According to the naturalistic worldview, the universe is a gigantic closed system because it is everything there is and there is nothing outside of it. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics tells us that processes taking place in a closed system always tend toward a state of equilibrium. If molecules of gas were introduced into a bottle, then they would eventually spread out evenly throuoghout the bottle. What this law implies when applied to the univeres as a whole is that given enough time, the universe and all its processes will run down, and the entire universe will come to equilibrium. Therfore, if the universe has always been there, then it would have reached this state of equilibrium an infinite amount of time ago. Since equilibrium in the universe has not been reached, the universe has not been here an infinite amount of time.
In the beginning God created… (Genesis 1:1)
In the next post we will look at the philosophical evidence for the beginning of the universe.
One response to “TLblog- The Kalam Cosmological Argument (Part 1- Scientific Observations) by Rand Wagner”
Why would God need a big bang to create a universe? Fifteen billion aught years of expansion and cooling and coalescing of galaxies and solar systems etc. smacks of process and intermediacy – the use of means to achieve ends. An omnipotent sovereign creator wills the desired state and it exists as though it had always been. And how are we to understand that God’s own universe is destined to fizzle to a state of equilibrium? The creation of on omnipotent sovereign persists depending only on the will of its creator.
I realize that you are not making your positive argument for the Christian God here, but since you mentioned Genesis 1:1, I don’t think I’m jumping too far ahead of the debate.
We can explain how the universe has developed to its current state from previous states through the application of observable laws. This should give us confidence that we will eventually discern the natural laws through which it came into existence. Singularities exist rather commonly within our universe. We have recently begun to observe the behavior of Singularities occurring in black holes. The day is yet young in science. Christian apologists trying to co-opt big bang cosmology are just seeking to pour new wine into the dried-out old wineskin of Genesis. Didn’t Jesus give a warning about that?
Christianity is a powerful meme that binds to many facets of a person’s life. You are a bright fellow, Rand, and I’m sure you have already had much intimation that apologetics are not really answers so many questions. I do hope that you will one day un-bow that knee and rise to embrace the true dignity and tragedy of humanity. Hey, atheists can be preachy too! ;-)
Leave a Reply