The universe had a beginning.

[Pray To Jesus]

Podcast: The Argument for Design in Cosmology

Video Explanation of Fine Tuning

“All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning."
Alexander Vilenkin

Reason why our Universe having an absolute beginning (Big Bang) points to a Creator.

Can the inflationary model explain fine tuning?

The universe had a beginning according to available evidence. That the universe had a beginning is one of many signs pointing to God's existence. It matches with what He tells us in the Bible. God is an eternal (outside of time) existence. The fine tuning of our universe is another of those many signs that point to God. Consider how true it is when He tells us:

I Am what I Am. The Alpha and the Omega.

___________________________________________________
This post is about how science is telling us how improbable it is that our universe came about by random chance. The probability that God created our universe is much higher.

String theory, M theory, inflationary theory, multiverse, branes, eternal expansion of bubble universes, anthropic theory, and quantum mechanic fluctuations are not realistic in that they fail to address the following issues without absurd consequences:

1) Fine tuning of many constants
2) Universe had a beginning
3) Low entropy Big Bang
4) Nothing (not anything) can't spontaneously become anything


FAQ:
If God created the universe, then who created God?

What are the fine tuning probabilities?

What is fine tuning? Is it a fallacy?

When does the BVG theorem apply?

Can the universe come from nothing due to quantum fluctuation?

Is the creator of the universe a personal God?

Why did God create man?

[FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif][SIZE=+1]Anthropic Principle[/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=+1][FONT=Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-serif,sans-serif]?[/FONT][/SIZE]

Does the anthropic principle explain fine tuning?

Do Anthropic Coincidences Require Explanation?

Is life designed by God?

What are the odds that life started spontaneously?

What is the extraordinary evidence fallacy?

 

[fskimospy]

God suffers from every first cause argument that the universe does. The only way theists get around this is by simply declaring him immune from it.

 

[Paul98]

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intel...d-a-beginning/

The universe had a beginning. This, along with the entropy issue, remove the popular scientific explanations of how the universe came to be. Physicists cannot explain it by using infinite past time, infinite bubble universes, cyclic universes, colliding branes, multiverse, etc.

The universe cannot come from nothing because nothing is really nothing. If you reason that quantum physics make it possible for the universe to begin from nothing, you have the same problem. Quantum physics is something, not nothing.

That the universe began is one of many signs pointing to God's existence. It matches with what He tells us in the Bible. God is an eternal (outside of time) existence.

Consider how true it is when He tells us:

I Am what I Am. The Alpha and the Omega.

 

[Vic]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

Exodus 3:14

 

[shabby]

That the universe began is one of many signs pointing to God's existence. It matches with what He tells us in the Bible. God is an eternal (outside of time) existence.

Who created god?

 

[woolfe9998]

God suffers from every first cause argument that the universe does. The only way theists get around this is by simply declaring him immune from it.

Uh yeah, obviously this. It boggles the mind that this bears repeating, as if the theist never had it explained before...

 

[Vic]

God suffers from every first cause argument that the universe does. The only way theists get around this is by simply declaring him immune from it.

The universe itself is immune to it, according to Einstein. Time is just the 4th dimension of space.
Asking what happened before the beginning is like asking what's north of the north pole (paraphrasing Hawking).

 

[JEDIYoda]

Historic Christianity has always maintained a belief in Creation ex nihilo (CEN) as expressed in the ancient Nicene Creed: "We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible."

Scripture teaches that there was nothing but God, and that God by means of his incalculable wisdom and infinite power alone brought the universe (all matter, energy, time, and space) into existence from nothing. There was no preexistent physical reality; therefore nothing should not be understood as an actual something.

Support for this truth-claim of historic Christianity can be found throughout Scripture, from Genesis through Revelation. (See sidebar.)
Reference Creation ex nihilo Statement
Genesis 1:1 Implies a singular beginning and that God created everything in its totality
Proverbs 3:19 By His wisdom God created the heavens and the earth
Psalm 90:2 Only God is eternal; the created order had a distinct beginning
John 1:3 Jesus Christ, who shares the divine nature, identified as taking part in the work of creation
Romans 4:17 God calls things into existence
Colossians 1:16 God created all things visible and invisible
Acts 4:24 God is the absolute Creator of everything
Acts 17:28 Creation is dependent on God for its very existence
2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2 God existed before time, implying that He created time
Hebrews 11:3 An explicit statement of Creation ex nihilo
Revelation 4:11 Describes what creation's (humanity's) response to the Creator should be
Theological Implications

It is important to underscore that when God created the universe He made no use of preexisting materials, nor did He make the world out of His own being. Christian theism rejects the view that identifies the world with God's being or essence (either pantheism or panentheism). God alone is infinite, eternal, and independent, while the physical universe, the creation, is finite, temporal, and contingent (matter is not eternal but results from the power of God's Word). CEN teaches not only that the universe had a singular beginning but also that the created order is continually dependent upon God's sustaining power. Since creating the world, the sovereign God continues to uphold, preserve, and direct His creation (Acts 4:27-28; Col. 1:17). The God of the Bible is therefore revealed as the transcendent Creator and immanent Sustainer of all things. God's wondrous intervention in His creation through the doctrine of divine providence overturns the deistic view of God. Deism sees the divine as wholly transcendent, a being who creates but does not intervene in the universe.

A profound practical implication of the doctrine of CEN is that only the sovereign Creator (who is also our benevolent Redeemer) is deserving of our worship, adoration, and devotion. A denial of the CEN doctrine would imply that matter is eternal and would constitute a challenge to God's independence and sovereignty. Scripture explicitly warns believers not to fall prey to idolatry by engaging in the false worship of the world or of particular things in the world (Ex. 20:3-6; Rom. 1:18-23). Yet, while not a proper object of worship, the universe because it was created by God nevertheless possesses objective meaning, purpose, and significance. This notion is even more emphatically true of human beings who were made in the expressed image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26-27) and who will live even after the present creation is destroyed and replaced (2 Pet. 3:7, 10, 13; Rev. 21:1).

An important qualification of God's creation out of nothing is that it only applies to God's initial creation of the universe. For example, God's subsequent creation of the animals (Gen. 2:19) and of humankind (Gen. 2:7) involved some use of preexisting materials (namely "the dust of the ground").
Apologetic Implications

Modern scientific cosmology buttresses the doctrine of CEN more pointedly and potently than does any other discipline. According to prevailing scientific theory, the universe had a singular beginning nearly 14 billion years ago. All matter, energy, time, and space exploded (in a carefully crafted event) into existence from nothing. This basic big bang cosmological model, which is embraced by the vast majority of research scientists because it has withstood extensive scientific testing, uniquely corresponds to the biblical teaching concerning CEN. It is nothing less than strikingly probative that a book written so long ago nonetheless contains a view of cosmology that matches so closely the latest and best scientific findings.

The Bible's description of God as sovereign over His creation serves to remind humans of their place in creation. And for Christians eager to engage skeptics with evidence for CEN, Scripture provides a basis for humility:

"This is what the LORD says-your redeemer, who formed you in the womb: I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself" (Isa. 44:24).

Although some Mormon writings refer to Jesus as the Messiah, Mormon doctrine about Jesus and the meaning of his messianic role are incompatible with historic Christian doctrine ("Starting Points," Q1, 2005, p.6). -ed.

 

[Exophase]

Somehow all of these philosophical arguments start by positing "there must have been a god who started things" but somehow that's supposed to segue into "... and it's the Christian God, btw"? Don't think that you can get people to believe in some kind of intelligent designer and that the rest just follows without saying, you've got a LOT more work to do than that. And yet it's really the second part that would have any kind of impact on anything, not the first.

It seems incredibly contradictory to parade around a cosmologist's viewpoints as proof for God on one hand then ignore how much modern cosmology (and other fields of science that talk about how the universe as we know it came to develop) runs counter to the description of the Christian God's history as presented in the Bible. And not just the parts in the first few chapters of Genesis. How can you attach any significance to someone's conclusion about the universe based purely on natural processes when you rely so heavily on an account of a God who throughout history turns nature completely on its side?

 

[fskimospy]

The universe itself is immune to it, according to Einstein. Time is just the 4th dimension of space.
Asking what happened before the beginning is like asking what's north of the north pole (paraphrasing Hawking).

I agree. It is an ouroboros.

 

[Matt1970]

We are insignificant specs of dust as far as TRUE understanding of the universe goes.

 

[JEDIYoda]

It seems incredibly contradictory to parade around a cosmologist's viewpoints as proof for God on one hand then ignore how much modern cosmology (and other fields of science that talk about how the universe as we know it came to develop) runs counter to the description of the Christian God's history as presented in the Bible.

pray tell examples of your ignorance please.....

They run counter to what? Or are you just trashing this thread...you do have examples don`t you??

 

[umbrella39]

The universe cannot come from nothing because nothing is really nothing.

Why not? Each and every single one of your posts have done just that. The universe is no different. You live in a vacuum.

 

[sandorski]

The Universe as we know it had a beginning. However, that doesn't mean that was the beginning of the Universe. Nor does it mean Nothing existed before that point. It just means that we don't Know what existed before that point.

 

[Exophase]

pray tell examples of your ignorance please.....

They run counter to what? Or are you just trashing this thread...you do have examples don`t you??

You're asking me to give an example of areas where the Bible runs counter to natural explanation? Isn't that pretty much the definition of a miracle? Do you want me to give examples of miracles in the Bible? Or should I just limit it to ones that should have left glaring evidence even today but haven't, or where evidence today grossly contradicts it?

The thing is, the more people learned about how the world around them actually normally works the more they had to insert a bunch of extra hidden miracles in the Bible to make sense of it (or just say any claims about how the world really works are wrong). One of the most glaring examples, the story of Noah's ark, would sound like a fairly straightforward and reasonable story to someone thousands of years ago. Today you need to have God playing all sorts of complex and puzzling acrobatics to really make it fit together. I'm going to assume you've already seen detailed descriptions of all the problems with this particular story so I'm not going to link one unless you really want (and can't spend a minute or two on Google)

 

[Jaepheth]

What is 1 + 1?

Child A: "I don't know"

Child B: "Apple!"


Child B must be correct because they have an answer, right?

[/logic behind claiming religion must be right because there's X that science can't perfectly answer and explain to your personal satisfaction]

 

[Pray To Jesus]

The Universe as we know it had a beginning. However, that doesn't mean that was the beginning of the Universe. Nor does it mean Nothing existed before that point. It just means that we don't Know what existed before that point.

Your argument is faulty.

Read the 1st link for more information.

 

[UberNeuman]

God would say the OP is full of shit. Since there is no "god", I'll say he's full of shit...

What we are now is aftermath of a random event......

 

[sandorski]

Your argument is faulty.

Read the 1st link for more information.

What part is faulty?

At most, if his rebuttals are accurate, all he has shown is that some current ideas are inaccurate.

Re: Entropy: That only applies in a Closed System. What if the Universe is not Closed?

 

[Carfax83]

God suffers from every first cause argument that the universe does. The only way theists get around this is by simply declaring him immune from it.

The entire concept of God or the Creator is centered around It being the Primal Cause of all phenomena, including Time and Space..

Therefore, God does not require a cause. It has simply always been, the uncaused Cause..

For something to create phenomenal reality from scratch, would It not need to be APART from it, existing in and of Itself?

 

[blankslate]

Who created god?

What if God is just a big computer?

Or maybe just a kid from a super advanced species who created our universe in a science project for their version of high school?

maybe it's the FSM?

 

[sandorski]

The entire concept of God or the Creator is centered around It being the Primal Cause of all phenomena, including Time and Space..

Therefore, God does not require a cause. It has simply always been, the uncaused Cause..

For something to create phenomenal reality from scratch, would It not need to be APART from it, existing in and of Itself?

That's where the argument Fails. You must show that such a thing exists before you can put it into the argument.

 

[ThinClient]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

Exodus 3:14

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

 

[ThinClient]

God suffers from every first cause argument that the universe does. The only way theists get around this is by simply declaring him immune from it.

/thread

 

[Carfax83]

That's where the argument Fails. You must show that such a thing exists before you can put it into the argument.

There's a lot of circumstantial evidence that suggests the Universe, and Life may have been created.

Take DNA for instance, a molecule that stores super dense information in a three dimensional structure in codified form.

There is absolutely no proof or even evidence that such a thing can occur via natural and unintelligent physical and chemical processes.

However, there is undeniable proof that Intelligence can create codes. We know there is because we humans create and use codes all the time. And not just humans, but other life forms as well.

Whether the Intelligence that designed DNA and genetic code is Divine or not is another question entirely, but I strongly believe you can make a powerful argument that an Intelligence (a Super Intelligence would be necessary) designed DNA due to it's attributes and the fact that there is no known natural force that can create codes.