University of Truth

613 Commandments!

#1. Does God Exist?

(Exodus 20:2, Deuteronomy 5:6)

    http://www.universityoftruth.org/613_Recordings/613P01.mp3  

recorded Feb23 2016


Leave off for a moment “Which God?”  The question is, does God exist?  If He does exist, the creation of the universe is easy enough.  This is true whether He creates the universe in an instant or over billions of years.  What difference how long it takes to create if we know God did it?  But if God does NOT exist, what created the universe? 

If we say the universe always existed, intrinsically, forever as it were, we have merely taken God, the ever-present, out of the equation but still left His eternal imprint upon the answer.  If we say, “The universe always was,” but refuse to acknowledge the eternity of God, are we not treading in hypocrisy?  Why would we accept the universe as eternal, on faith, but reject an eternal God?  If we say there is a science which makes the universe eternal, aren’t there things in the universe which must be eternal also?  Since this MUST be true, under this hypothesis, that an eternal universe is composed of eternal things, why dismiss the possibility of an eternal God? 

Is it because we, as mortals, view only non-living things, such as rock or gas, as eternal, but anything living as finite and mortal?  But I ask, if the non-living things comprise the eternal universe, where did those non-living things come from?  Shall we say the solids came from gases?  Where did the gases come from?  Shall we say the gases came from pure eternal energy?  Where did the pure eternal energy come from?  Shall we say the pure eternal energy came from another dimension?  Where did that other dimension come from?  And so on, ad infinitum.  Eventually, “where did that come from?” leads us to the eternal thing or things which are, or have been, basis for all other things.  

We cannot say ALL things in the eternal universe are eternal, for those things which are mortal surely came after, and have come from, the eternal things.  The mortal cannot give birth to the immortal.  Only the immortal, the eternal, can give birth to the mortal.  So we cannot say human consciousness is the eternal thing which predates, and therefore we cannot say that we, by our consciousness, individual or collective, created the universe.  

But if we did say such a thing, have we not said there is an eternal consciousness which creates?  And if we say there is an eternal consciousness which creates, how shall we not call that eternal consciousness God?  Or, shall we say WE are God?  If so, why are we mortal?  But if it is only our bodies which are mortal, but our consciousness is immortal, eternal, do we not have an eternal spirit?  Where did THAT come from?  Did we create ourselves?  If we did, why did we create ourselves as mortal, flawed, and without memory that we are immortal and eternal, except we have religion among us, which posits an immortal soul?  But if I have an immortal soul, is my eternal soul an individual independent immortal consciousness, or is it under control by an even greater eternal consciousness, which we call God?  

Any hypothesis of an eternal universe which contains mortal beings must explain how an eternal thing creates, or permits to create, a mortal thing.  What does an eternal thing know of mortality?  What sort of transformation causes eternal things to transmute to mortal things?  We know it can be done in the laboratory, where, under the right conditions, inorganic things can be turned into organic things.  But this is done under the direction of a creator, the scientist, who replicates a process.  This scientist discovers the process, but does not invent it.  Who invented it?  But if you say the process was of chaos, and no one invented it, that is, there is no God, how does chaos turn the eternal into the  mortal? Where does chaos get this power?  And, anyway, where did chaos come from?  Do you see?

Mortal things must come from eternal things, and this is why the theory of the eternal universe still endures, though that theory is weak, explaining much while showing very little.  In fact, the theory of the eternal universe is just a way to take God out of the equation while retaining all the eternal qualities of God in said universe.  But what if we embrace instead a universe which did NOT always exist? That takes God out of the equation altogether, right?  Not at all.

If we say the universe did not always exist, is NOT eternal, we must ask how “nothing” came to be “something,” or how “something” came from “nothing.”  Again, we speak of process.  The scientist who claims to create life from non-living substance has only utilized a substance which already exists.  There is a joke that goes: A scientist tells God, “I can create life also.”  God tells the scientist to go ahead and do so.  The scientist picks up a handful of dust to begin the process, but God stops the scientist and says, “Make your OWN dust.”  This is the conundrum of the joke: Where did dust come from?  Is the scientist able to provide his own building blocks, or does the scientist begin with things which already exist? Thus, the weak theory of the eternal universe is posited to provide an answer to this riddle without explaining it, putting God into the equation without saying “God.”  

But the theory of something from nothing is ALSO without explanation, only from a different angle.  Whereas the theory of the eternal universe circumvents Creation, the theory of something from nothing circumvents Natural Law.  What natural laws provide for the creation of energy from nothing?  What natural laws provide for the creation of matter from nothing?  There are none.  There are in fact “laws of conservation” which prevent the creation of any new energy into the universe.  

Energy cannot be created.  Energy can only be unlocked, as from burning wood, or smashing an atomic particle.  Something from nothing is in fact prevented by the science!  Why then is such hypothesis popular?  Likely because it sweeps away the hypothesis of the eternal universe, which for many is too close for comfort to a notion of God.  It is a prejudice against God.  But the hypothesis of something from nothing is also close to God, for where does such power originate?

Those who sweep away “origination” as not a scientific pursuit, saying we cannot speak about that which cannot be quantified, are not only hypocrites to their own scientific pursuit, but also hypocrites to those things which are yet unknown or invisible which they rely upon each day, even without thinking about it.  For example, whether or not they have a thing called a “personality.”  The personality cannot be placed in a test tube, but it exists as a matter of result.  It makes the flesh animated with spirit, and thought, and guides the emotional chemistry.  No one would deny the existence of personality, but it cannot be seen outside the effect it has on the body it inhabits.

Likewise, God is invisible, but His effects are evident.  The most important effect of God is the existence of Order.  Only under God is the existence of order to be called “natural.”  Without God, any unifying force of order which is not named “God” has only been renamed as a way of dissecting the forces which God sets in motion.  For example, gravity.  You may quantify the effects of gravity, even posit a singular building block called a graviton, but I will still ask you, “Where did THAT come from?”  Gravity is not chaotic, but of order.  Where there is gravity, it works within its parameters on every object within its sphere of influence.  Therefore, gravity is ordered.  Therefore, gravity is ordered by SOMETHING.

And it is not ONLY gravity which is ordered.  Genetics, for example, is ordered so that human beings give birth to human beings and not frogs or oak trees, though the scientist would have you believe we are all so closely related by DNA.  That DNA is ordered to produce not only species, but also race (or type), and to have pleasing genetic qualities which produce familial togetherness, to accept the child.  Leaving off for now from such anomalies as birth defects, we can readily see that the miracle of birth is miraculous just from being able to recognize that which comes from the womb.

The fact that beings reproduce at all is not intrinsic to life but is rather an evidence of God.  What do I mean by this?  If we say the mortal came from the eternal, it means the mortal was not always here, but was created by some process.  If the process came from randomness, this process should be considered rare.  Rare because any random process is neither directed nor repeatable.  If life originated from randomness, there was no scientist (God) laying out the many steps in a controlled environment, and therefore life originated from chaos, with only one chance to succeed.  “Only one chance” because we cannot make wild claims that Life may originate from any number of paths, or may have an infinite number of attempts to originate.  

But even if it were possible for life to originate from many paths, or have many attempts to originate, environment is critical.  Under randomness, we cannot say Life was created to suit the environment, only that the environment, by chance, just happened to suit that very rare moment when Life was created.  This is only the first miracle regarding the origination of Life!  

Such life created must also find food to sustain it.  Under randomness, we cannot say Life was created to suit the food available, only that, by slim odds, the food available just happened to not be poison for that random life-form.  Another miracle!  Then, such life-form must be able to digest such food, and to excrete the waste product.  How is it that Life was created by randomness with such organic systems in place already, and which suited the environment of its time and place?!  How is it that Life was created by randomness with the correct breathing apparatus?  How is it that Life was created by randomness with a reproductive system?  

Think how miraculous this all is.  Life, being fragile, is somehow born into, or otherwise created from, an environment, where the atmosphere just happened to contain the correct mixture of gases, and the food within its reasonable grasp just happened to be nutritious and appetizing, not repellant and poisonous.  This new life-form also just happened to have a suitable breathing apparatus and digestive system for an environment, never mind the one into which it randomly appeared! This new life-form, without prior experience, or even parents, also just happened to have an ability to reproduce!  You may say such life-form “evolved” from amino acids, but then I must ask you where the amino acids came from, and how did they acquire such abilities, and how did they come to have their own systems of reproduction? 

Do you see how unreasonable it is to expect randomness to produce Life?  The eternal universe has no purpose to create a mortal thing unless the universe is guided by purpose.  Under randomness, mortal things have virtually no chance of coming into existence, and less chance (if that is possible) to sustain. The number of suitable environments for a first life-form are greatly outweighed by the number of unsuitable environments.  The mortal thing has no idea which life-support systems are required for the time and place where it comes to exist.

Under randomness, therefore, the odds of mortal life coming to be, whether in an eternal universe or a created universe, are astronomical, and the odds of such mortal life surviving a likely harsh, even deadly, environment is astronomical times astronomical times astronomical, a billion times a billion times a billion, for each succeeding "miracle" which creates and sustains that life-form. These are exponential hurdles reaching insurmountable heights.  Exponentially, it must be called impossible.  It is not just a "miracle" but rather millions of miracles, each miracle individually and separately relying upon further miracles to sustain, while simultaneously working in tandem to produce a universe, intertwined ecosystems, and suitable life-forms.

But with God, the One who by definition has the means and the plan, such things are not only a probability but also a surety.  God can create an entire universe. God can make the mortal thing from the eternal. God can create Life from nothing, whether we say He does so in an instant or over billions of years.  He can create the environments where Life may exist and thrive.  He can provide the life-support systems.  God can sustain Life where chaos and randomness cannot.  God can create Life with a reproductive system, so it can recreate.  God can create the DNA which sustains the species for as long as His purpose allows it to be sustained. 

It is a huge concept, but a simple one also.  The odds of randomness creating and sustaining the universe and Life are a zillion to one against it.  For the origination of the universe, or of Life, is not a linear time-line, like a powdery fuse, set off by a single event, like a spark. No, the origination of the universe, and of Life, is so dependent on perfection that the numbers of restarts necessary from aborted chaotic timelines makes origination and sustenance through randomness into a joke.  Simply, randomness and chaos does not, and cannot, produce order. 

Chaos by definition is destructive. Only God has the power to continuously and consistently make chaos into order.  The fact that chaotic quantum physics produces ordered reality, even perceived ordered reality, is further proof that a guiding hand rules at the most fundamental levels.  

God is the very definition of universal Order. God orders amidst chaos, and amidst randomness.  God is greater than chaos, both in power and in mathematical surety. The odds of God creating and sustaining the universe and Life are 100%.  Evolution is not a seamstress of invention against necessity, nor is it claimed to be.  God is.

Every system of sustenance is of Order, whether it is genetics, or quantum physics, or hydrodynamics.  We depend on Order to be sustained, and we are sustained by Order, not chaos.

There is no third option.  There is either a Creator or chaos.  Chaos does not create, except accidentally, without purpose, and temporarily.  If any such order created sustains, it sustains through a guiding hand.

Why then is God rejected, but chaos credited, for the origination and sustenance of all things?  Why would anyone refuse to acknowledge God when plainly chaos cannot be credited?  Simply, chaos does not ask for our allegiance and obedience, but God does. The man who swears by science, but not God, permits himself to observe the truth of God, His creation, without also following the Law of God.  This man credits chaos for the origination and sustenance of all things, and if this makes no sense, even to himself, it still permits him to freely ignore the Law of God.  It's that simple. There is no "scientific integrity" that God must be produced before this man believes. This man already  believes in an invisible creator of unfathomable powers called "creative chaos." This man simply renames God for the express purpose of ignoring God's commandments that limit his personal behavior. Do you see?  This so-called "man of science" believes in magical and mythical forces which overcome the odds against the origination and sustenance of all things, but refuses to say it is God. For if he did, he would be obliged to follow the Law of God to a greater degree.

Does God exist?  The science and math does not allow for absence of a Creator. Everything we know is of Order.  Chaos exists but is also a creation of God, and is not permitted to destroy every moment.   Chaos is ordered by God.  Even Time, the great destroyer of all things, is subject to Order.    

Overwhelmingly, the evidence is that God exists.

***********************

BACK TO 613 INDEX


Copyright 2004-2017 Tom Wise. All Rights Reserved.