Transcript The Cosmological Argument

Does God Exist?
The Cosmological Argument
Goldsmith & McAtee
The Design Argument
Dana & Betsy Harris
God & the Meaning of Life
Hedges & Homoya
Science & Christianity
Brenner & Scott
The Cosmological Argument
by: Reid Goldsmith
and Ben McAtee
Overview of the Kalam Argument
Kalam Argument
Universe
Beginning
Caused
Personal
No Beginning
Not caused
Not Personal
Actual Infinity
Represented by the figure to the right
a0-1= a0
a0+1= a0
a0-n= a0
a0+n= a0
a0* a0= a0
a
An actual infinite cannot exist because it creates
irreconcilable paradoxes
0
Potential Infinity
lim1/n= 
n0
• A potential infinite
increases its number
through time
• A potential infinite is
always finite
• A potential infinite can
never become an
actual infinite.
Kalam: First Premise and First
Argument
• Since an actual infinite
cannot exist, then there is
a finite number of past
events in this universe.
• If there is a finite number
of past events, at some
point, there was no
universe
• Therefore, there must have
been a beginning to our
universe
Kalam: First Premise and Second
Argument
• Even if an actual infinite could
exist, it is impossible to traverse
an actual infinite
• If there are an actual infinite
number of points between point
Z and point Y, then it would
take infinite time to traverse
that segment
• The argument from nature of
causal sequences helps us to
understand this phenomenon.
Y
B
A
Z
Argument from Causal
Sequences
• Imagine, if you will, a helicopter flying over your head. How
did it get there?
• Here’s how it got there. The pilot got into the helicopter.
The pilot getting into the helicopter is the direct cause of the
helicopter flying over your head.
• The fact that there is a causal relationship between the pilot
getting in the chopper and the chopper flying over your head
means that there are specific instances in the past that you
can determine, thus proving that there isn’t an actual infinite
number of past events. (The chicken and the egg is a perfect
example of this)
Expansion from Nothing
• In 1920, Astronomer
Edwin Hubble discovered
the Red Shift.
– The red shift proves the
universe is expanding
• If the universe is
expanding, it must have
had a starting point.
Hence, the universe had a
beginning.
• The big bang theory states
that this beginning was a
giant explosion from an
infinitesimal point.
Second law of Thermodynamics
• The Second law defines Entropy as either energy, disorder,
or information.
• The second law states that Entropy is always increasing in
the universe.
• If the universe had not had a beginning, we would have
reached an equilibrium of disorder right now, the universe
being completely in disorder. We would all be a bunch of
quarks and mesons flying around in a soup of energy. But,
since that hasn’t happened, then the universe had a
beginning.
Kalam Premise 2: The Beginning of
the Universe was Caused
• Because the universe began to exist, it’s
logical to assume it was caused.
• Something does not come from nothing
without a cause.
• Events have a definite beginning and end
and do not happen without something
causing them.
God Needed no Cause Because
He had no Beginning
• God does not need a cause, because He is
neither an event or a contingent being.
• Because God is a necessary being, He does
not need a cause.
• Asking for a cause for God is illogical. It’s
asking for a cause for an uncaused Being.
So….
• Even if the beginning being something from
nothing were logically possible, it’s still
physically impossible
• There is therefore no reason to deny what
we witness every day: events have causes.
• The beginning, being an event, must have
had a cause.
Kalam Premise 3: The Cause for
the Universe was Personal
• The cause had to either be personal or
impersonal.
• Prior to the universe, there was a state of no
time, no space, and no change of any kind.
• The conditions for the beginning were
either existent from all eternity in a state of
“immutability,” or they had to come to be.
So What is the “First Event?”
• If the conditions had to come to be, then
that in itself was the first event.
• This couldn’t be because before the initial
universe, there was no order and no change.
• The only way to avoid the first event being
uncaused is to say that conditions existed in
a timeless, changeless state.
And…
• If this was an impersonal beginning, then
when the cause existed, the effect would
have taken place, simply because all the
conditions were in their proper place.
• If there is no waiting, then an infinite cause
would have caused an infinite effect. This
goes back to the universe being infinite.
The Cause had to be Personal
• The only way the first event could have
come spontaneously from a timeless,
changeless state is to be caused by a free act
of a person or agent, meaning it was created
on purpose.
• You can raise your arm if conditions are
right, but conditions don’t cause it. It’s an
act of free will.
To Sum it all Up:
• It’s not logical to believe that the beginning
of the universe was caused by a timeless,
impersonal act or force.
• This shows that for us to exist there needs to
be some supreme, necessary Being who was
our cause.
DESIGN ARGUMEN
DESIGN ARGUMENT
ARGUMENT
IGNDESIGN
ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGU
DESIGN ARG
DESIGN AR
THE DESIGN
ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
IGN ARGUMENT DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN ARGUMENT
DESIGN
KINDS OF DESIGN
ORDER
*THE UNIVERSE IS ARRANGED*
Quantitative sequences (orderly arrangements)
the color spectrum
Regularities of spatial compresence
roads on maps at right angles
Regularities of temporal succession
sequence of notes in a song
KINDS OF DESIGN
PURPOSE
ARRANGEMENT REFLECTS A PLAN OF THE DESIGNER
Biological vs. Nonbiological
e.g. body functions, eyes, etc. = biological
e.g. freezing point of water, answer to prayer =
nonbiological
KINDS OF DESIGN
SIMPLICITY
THE UNIVERSE IS A RESULT OF A SINGLE, RATIONAL,
EFFICIENT MIND
The Grand Unified Theory = one simple
theory which unifies forces
e.g. an apple falling and the galaxy
rotating all because of the Law of Gravity
KINDS OF DESIGN
COMPLEXITY
THE UNIVERSE IS COMPLEX
Simple unity with complex diversity shows great
design
EXAMPLES:
Snowflakes
Organic compounds and DNA
KINDS OF DESIGN
BEAUTY
BEAUTY POINTS TO A GRAND ARTIST
BEAUTY IN MATH POINTS TO A GRAND MIND
The world demonstrates objective
beauty (e.g. sunsets)
This leads to a Creative Designer
KINDS OF DESIGN
SENSE &
COGNITION
WE CAN PERCEIVE AND THINK ABOUT THE WORLD
Our senses did not evolve out of survival value
Senses we use to accurately think about our
world go beyond what we need to survive
KINDS OF DESIGN
INFORMATION
INFORMATION EXISTS OUT OF AND PRIOR TO THE ARRANGEMENT OF THE
PARTSMEANING EXISTS IN THE AUTHOR
High order, little information = snowflakes
High order, high information = living
organisms, DNA
KINDS OF DESIGN
*ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE*
COSMIC
CONSTANTS
The universe unfolded with life in mind
CONSTANTS:
1. No life could be possible had all the forces in the world
been slightly smaller or larger
2. Only on earth is life possible and probable
3. Formation of life from non-life is 1x 1040000 chance
KINDS OF DESIGN
COSMIC
CONSTANTS
“It is hard to resist the impression that
the present structure of the universe,
apparently so sensitive to minor
alteration in the numbers, has been rather
carefully thought out ... the seemingly
miraculous concurrence of [these]
numerical values must remain the most
compelling evidence for cosmic design.”
- theoretical physicist Paul Davies
God and the Meaning of Life
By Aaron Homoya
&
Josh Hedges
God and the Meaning of Life
• Most Urgent of Questions
– Why does the universe exist? Why is there
something instead of nothing?
– Why do human beings in general exist?
– Why do I exist?
God and the Meaning of Life
• Are there any objective values which
provide significance and a goal or purpose
for the universe as a whole, human life in
general, or my life in particular?
-What is the meaning of moral statements?
-Why should I be moral?
The Meaning of Moral
Statements
• Metaethics: That branch of philosophy
which analyzes the meaning of certain
moral terms
– (right, wrong, good, bad, ought, worth, and so
forth)
The Meaning of Moral
Statements
• “You Can’t Know” Theories - Statements
do not give information, and are not true or
false
– ex. “x is right” really means “hurray for x!”
– or “x is right” means “do x!”
The Meaning of Moral
Statements
• “You Can Know” Theories - statements give
factual information and can be true or false
- Subjectivist Theories: moral statements convey
information about the speaker
-ex. “x is right” means “I think x is right”
- Or “we in our culture like x” Objectivist Theories: moral statements convey
information by properties of people or acts
-ex. “x is right” means “what is best for the
most amount of people”
- Or “x is right” simply means “x is right”
Reasons for Being Moral
• Why should I adopt the moral point of view
as a guiding force over my life?
• Justifications for morality
– What rational justification can be given to me
as to why it would be reasonable for me to
adopt the moral point of view?
Four Views of the Meaning of
Life
The Four Views of the Meaning of Life
Nihilism
Existentialism
Transcendentalism
Christian Theism
Nihilism
• Beliefs
–
–
–
–
Human existence is totally meaningless
There are no values, thus no reason to be moral
God is dead
Science has shown life to be meaningless
Nihilism
• Objections
– Values may exist even though they cannot be
proven
• Proof of everything is not necessary. Proving proof
would continue ad infinitum.
• Nazi genocide and the torture of babies is obviously
wrong.
– Questions of meaning and value are outside the
limits of science
– Nihilism is unlivable and cannot be rationally
recommended
Existentialism
• Beliefs
– There is no reason for existence, but humans
create values and give life their own meaning
– Life can be subjectively satisfying
• Objections
– Suggests living a life of delusion
– No rational justification over nihilism
– No rational objection to obvious moral
atrocities (ex. Nazis, torturing babies, etc.)
Transcendentalism
• Beliefs
– There is no reason for existence, but life has
objective meaning because objective values can
be found within life
• Objections
– Cannot account for moral guilt (Guilt requires a
Person to feel guilty towards)
– Moral values without moral law-giver does not
make sense
Transcendentalism
• Objections (continued)
– If moral values are cosmic entities, why would
they have do with us?
– Cannot explain how detailed aspects of
morality can be known
– Has no adequate answer for why to obey
morality over one’s selfish interests
Christian Theism
• Beliefs
– The universe, man, and individuals have reason
for existence and for living
– Cosmos exists to glorify God and promote the
good of His creatures
– Human history has purpose, showing the
struggle between good and evil
– Values come from God, through nature and the
Bible
Christian Theism
• Beliefs (continued)
– Motives for morality
• the love of God
• the sake of doing right
• the rewards of obeying God
– Morality is based on God’s nature
– Man has free will and was designed to find
meaning in God
– Value and purpose are based in God’s nature
Conclusion
• Nihilism and Existentialism are empty and
lacking purpose
• Transcendentalism and Christian Theism
affirm the existence of values and purpose
– Christian Theism has a better explanation
– Christian Theism has only weak objections
Science and Christianity
By
Dave Scott
and
Daphne Brenner
Science vs. Religion
• Description of relationship: allies, enemies,
other
• Science claims that it alone is the model of
truth and rationality; Christianity must
conform to it
• Religion argues that it has yet to be proven
irrational or a matter of opinion
Is Science Reliable?
Successful?
• The majority of modern scientists embrace
realism
• Most Creation/ Evolution debates assume
scientific realism
• 3 views of scientific realism
– Rational realism
– Nonrational realism
– Nonrational nonrealism
Rational Realism
• Scientific theories are true or approximately true
• A properly developed theory makes existence
claims
• Rationality is an objective notion and conceptual
relativism is false
• A scientific theory will be simple, clear consistent,
relevant, and useful.
• The aim of science is a literally true picture of the
world
Nonrational Realism
• Objectivity, but reality lies beyond what our senses
tell us
• Science presently gives inaccurate descriptions
– Scientific knowledge is only what we can perceive
with our senses
– Theories are just sets of lab operations and
recorded numbers
– Science only desires working theories, which might
not be true
– Science aims to find theories that adequately yield
desirable results and observations
Nonrational Nonrealism
• There is no objective sense in which science
is rational
• There are no givens
• Rival theories or models cannot be
compared
• Science is no more than rules
scientists have chosen to accept
The Value of Opposing
Arguments
• Science is limited by its own rules.
• Science’s main support lies in philosophy
• Science assumes the senses are reliable and
give accurate information about the physical
world
• Science is an ever-changing discipline
Science as Solid Fact?:
Presuppositions of Science
• Objects are immediate, not sensual
• The laws of logic are true and truth exists
• The mind is logical and can understand the
universe.
• Assumes uniformity of nature, boundary
conditions, and universals
• Validity of scientific method; sound,
honorable conduct
Science and Theology are
Compatible
• Both disciplines speak about the origin of the
cosmos, man and life in general.
• They describe the same reality using different
methods
• Complementary view: How? What? + Who?
Why?
• Theology asserts that God acts directly and
indirectly
• The Christian worldview is most congruent with
science
Creation Science: Outlined
• Ex nihilo creation
• Inadequacy of macroevolutionary theory
• plants and animals created within fixed
limits
• “Man ain’t no
. monkey!”
• Catastrophism in geology
• Young Earth
Scientific Validity of Creation
Science
• Supernatural terms (God) can function
within theories describing the natural
• Biblical roots do not disqualify truth
• Makes predictions
• No less open to revision than modern
evolutionary science
Support for a Literal Genesis
Account
• Yom- Hebrew word -“Day”
– In Mosaic books, a numerical adjective always
means a literal 24 hours
– In OT, 97% of its 1900 uses, it is literal
• Chronological order usually the backbone
of Biblical narrative
• Genesis 1&2 set the tone for a historical
narrative
Flaws in Macroevolutionary
Theory
•
•
•
•
Myth of the Prebiotic Soup
Limited Genetic Potential
Problems in the fossil record
2nd Law of Thermodynamics says “A
chance of 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power”
Closing Statements
•
•
•
•
•
Science is not infallible
Religion is not irrational
Christian theology is integrable with science
Creation science is scientific
Darwinian science is not proven fact