And The Self Existing One Is.........

When you look around, you see nature. It spans from your horizon to the end of the universe. We are not sure we have seen the end of the universe yet. Thus we all agree that nature is a reality that we all can behold.

For an inquisitive mind, the questions do not end there. How did nature come into existence? Was it always like this? Will it always be like this? Obviously, we can come to three different conclusions about this. One, as Carl Sagan declared, 'universe is all there is.' Many people believe that the universe existed like this forever and it is the ultimate reality. Many others believe that this universe had a beginning and it will have an end. The Big Bang Theory, which is very popular today, shows us this. It leads to another question though- what will happen after that?

Everyone who believes that this universe had a beginning has to ask a question: What caused that beginning? How did it take place? The Big Bang Theory is viewed by different groups differently. Atheists consider it a pure chance thing. If that is true, the entire universe, including us, exists today purely by chance.

The Theists (people who believe in a God) say that it was not accidental. The universe came into being by the intentional act of God. But all of them do not hold to the same line of thinking (as we will see shortly).

One thing is for sure. Either nature (universe) or God has to be self-existent for us to be here.

Humanist Manifesto III declares: Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are from things as we might wish or imagine them to be.......The responsibility for our lives and the kind of world in which we live is ours and ours alone.¹

It is interesting to note that both groups use the Cosmological Argument to prove their point. The atheistic, materialistic, rationalist side argues like this: It is logically necessary that if there exist parts of a whole, the whole exists. Each part of the whole has a sufficient cause of its existence in earlier parts. Accordingly, the existence of each part has a causal explanation and the existence of the whole has a logical explanation.² To break it down, this is what they are saying: The whole consists of all of its parts. The universe consists of galaxies that contain stars that have planets going around them. If we accept this observed reality, then we cannot deny the existence of the universe as a whole! As for the existence of the galaxies and stars and planets, one can argue that it came from something else, like cosmic dust or cosmic gases. Even now we observe the enormous gaseous nurseries that are giving birth to new stars. Thus, based on our observations, we can conclude that galaxies and stars, and planets have reason to exist since cosmic gases and dust are still present in the universe. To summarize: “If x is a part of the universe, it has a reason in earlier parts; if x is the universe, it has a reason for its existence in the existence of its parts.”³

Fordham University Professor William Rowe has shown that "such a proposed explanation is circular."⁴  

Theists present the Cosmological Argument in two basic forms. One is the ‘kalam’ (Arabic for eternal) argument, which argues for the Beginner of this universe. The second is the argument for a Sustainer of the universe.

The kalam argument goes like this: Everything that had a beginning had a cause. The universe had a beginning. Therefore, the universe had a Cause. The second argument supplements the first both philosophically and scientifically.⁵  Scientific arguments for the origin of the universe are presented based on the second law of thermodynamics, the expansion of the universe, radiation echo of the Big Bang, discoveries by the Hubble telescope, and Einstein’s theory of general relativity.

While contending that their positions are based on logic and scientific observations, Quentin Smith and other materialistic philosophers and scientists end up with plain declarations (like in Humanist manifesto III) or circular arguments. Their bias is publicly proclaimed. They are looking for an explanation apart from a Supreme Being.

But ‘the cumulative philosophical and scientific evidence for an origin of the material universe provides a strong reason to conclude that there must have been a nonphysical originating Cause of the physical universe.’⁶ Astronomer Robert Jastrow admits that this is a clearly theistic conclusion, and states that ‘it is a scientifically proven fact that supernatural forces are at work.’⁷

All theistic arguments, while incorporating a Supreme Creator, are not the same. Pantheism argues for a God who is one with the universe, which means the universe existed eternally with God. It concludes that God and the Universe as one. Yet, the universe being materialistic, can have beginnings and ends. This argument is received well by many in the West now since it is in line with the scientists who argue that this present universe will run down to a point of singularity and another Big Bang will cause a new universe. Hence the increasing popularity of pantheistic religions like Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. in the West. But one logical question is this: If the universe and God are one, what happens to God when the universe runs down to a point of singularity? He also becomes a point of singularity?

Christian theism bases its arguments on revelation, both the general revelation of God in the universe and God's special revelation through His Word, the Bible. Both present a God who is the Creator and the Sustainer of this universe. The Bible also talks about changes to the universe. But God is an eternal, unchanging Creator outside of His creation. Look at this incredible passage:

            Of old You laid the foundation of the earth,

And the heavens are the work of Your hands.

They will perish, but You will [d]endure;

Yes, they will all grow old like a garment;

Like a cloak You will change them,

And they will be changed.

But You are the same,

And Your years will have no end.⁸

For anyone with an open mind, there is only one conclusion. Nature (universe) cannot be self-existing. Everything points to its beginning in time. That means the self-existing ultimate reality is God.

 

¹ https://americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/manifesto3/

² Smith, Quentin: A Cosmological Argument for a Self-Caused Universe (2008). https://infidels.org/library/modern/quentin_smith/self-caused.html

³ibid

⁴ Rowe, William (1998). The Cosmological Argument. Fordham: Fordham University Press. P.xvi.

⁵ Geisler, Norman (202). Systematic Theology, Volume One. Grand Rapids, MI: Bethany House Publishers. p.27-28.

⁶ibid

⁷Jastrow, Robert. “A Scientist Caught Between Two faiths: Interview With Robert Jastrow.” Christianity Today (August 6, 1982).

⁸ Psalm 102:25-27 (NKJV)