Go to home, then the sidebar on the right, find categories > apologetics and scroll down to 21 November 2007. [ Go ]

There is good reason to object to the first premise of the argument. Scientific knowledge tells us that the current state of the universe began with the Big Bang, but Stephen Hawking has also suggested that the laws of physics break down prior to the singularity. If that is the case, the state of things prior to the Big Bang are irrelevant because there is no standard of measuring them.

Since the events prior to the singularity can’t even be speculated, belief in a supernatural first cause still requires an irrational leap of faith.

I’ll try and check out that post, too.

Stephen

I hope to also write about logical arguments for the reliability of the Bible.

Many people are also skeptical about God because of the whole “prayer” thing, but it is my belief that people do not really understand what prayer is all about (not that I claim to be an expert); it’s so much more than just asking for stuff or a magical incantation. I’ve got another post on the purpose of prayer purhaps you’d be interested in reading.

Scott

Even should this argument be sound, there is absolutely no reason to jump from “there must be an infinite cause” to “it’s the Christian God who answers prayers, judges souls and inspires holy books.” That remains a blind leap of faith.

It is my understanding that any scientific knowledge regarding the goings-ons prior to the Big-Bang is premature. If we are to believe the laws of physics, time and gravity (perhaps even cause and effect?) came into existence with the Big Bang, some really weird, counter-intuitive things could have gone on prior to it.

As someone who is most definitely not a astronomer, physicist or cosmologist, I could be totally wrong on this. But again, it’s my understanding that scientists don’t really know what went on before this universe began.

With regard to the impossibly of an infinite series of events, I’d like to propose that there is a large, important difference between saying the building blocks of our universe came to be an infinity ago and suggesting the universe simply never began.

If we are to go with the latter, we see time and events on a relative scale, hence solving the problem.

This argument really boils down to another god of the gaps fallacy: contemporary science restricts us to uncertainty about an event in nature, therefore a supernatural cause is invoked to explain it away.

Unfortunately, this only pushes the question back a step leaving unexplained the origins of the defined cause, answering a mystery with an even bigger mystery.

Stephen