The Flaw in the "Everything Has a Creator" Argument
Presented as a Logic Argument Without Any Logic
Evolution is a theory as to how speciation occurs. It puts forth no speculation on either the origin of life or the origin of the universe. The theory of evolution only describes change based on evidence found in the natural world. Although the argument is often used that evolution couldn't cause the origin of the universe, I won't bother to rebut it because the two are unrelated and evolutionary theory doesn't even speculate on the origin of the universe.
The Big Bang Theory is a good hypothesis as to how the universe reached its current state. It is based on observations of the physical universe and the laws of nature as observed by man.
But the argument put forth against both theories is that absolutely everything must have an intelligent creator. The problem with this broad statement is that those who state that everything must have a creator will not answer the question of "Who or what created God?" without countering their own statement that everything must have a creator. So either God was created and their logic is consistent or God was not created and their logic is not consistent.
So who created God? And if God was not created, then why could not other things exist without a creator as well? The only answer I've ever gotten is not really an answer at all - "God has always existed." And what is the proof? The Bible.
So it really isn't even logic at all. It is a shadow play at logic, a pretense that those who use it don't even realize. But why does the pretense exist at all? Why can't people just say that they don't believe in evolution, the Big Bang Theory, or other science because they have faith in what the Bible says, that they will believe everything the Bible says no matter what evidence is presented?
There's no point to trying to make it look like an opinion arrived at by logic when clearly, it is arrived at by faith. If the logic isn't consistent, it is useless to try to convert people with it. And, in my opinion, the attempt to convert people (to save them from eternal torture by a loving God) is the only reason people came up with the "everything must have an intelligent creator" line.
Published by Kylyssa Shay
Kylyssa Shay spent 18 years as a professional floral designer and has aquacultured marine life for fun and profit. Ms. Shay is a freelance writer, an atheist and an avid life-long learner with unusual life e... View profile
- Review: The Big Bang Theory Series Premiere Promises to Set a New Record or Does It?Does The Big Bang Theory make the mark? A review of the series premiere.
Fall T.V.: Big Bang Theory PilotBig Bang Theory premiered on Sept. 24th on CBS.- The Big Bang Theory: A Rare GemIf you haven't given The Big Bang Theory a chance, here's what you've been missing.
- The Big Bang TheoryThe Big Bang Theory is perhaps the most conclusive answer to the question "Where did this all come from?"
- Why I Do Not Believe in the Big Bang TheoryI predict that centuries from now we will look back on the Big Bang Theory, and consider it just another mythological model of universe, dreamt up and accepted by a very violent culture.
- "The Big Bang Theory" Pilot Review
- Preview of the New Show, The Big Bang Theory on CBS
- Fall TV Preview: The Big Bang Theory
- A Sneak Peek at "The Big Bang Theory"
- The "Big Bang Theory" Offers Small Laughs
- A Rational Cosmology: A Refutation of Big Bang Theory
- Is the Big Bang Theory in Trouble?
- If the logic isn't consistent, it is useless to try to convert people with it.
13 Comments
Post a Commenttheir ideas accurately presented. If you have an interest in actually knowing what this is about you could read my article "The Cosmological Argument" on AC.
I've never heard of any responsible Theologian or Theist Philosopher say that everything must have a creator. Aristotle was the first to elaborate The Cosmological Argument. The substance of this argument is that things in the physical world are subject to physical laws, not everything but these things. In the physical world we find innumerable strings of causal chains. These chains of causality either represent an infinite regress or they must have a first cause. The infinite regress makes no sense so that first cause which set the Universe in motion must be a self-existent God. The Big Bang theory makes no sense because it means that "Nothing is the cause of everything." If that is true, you have denied one of the most basic principles of Science "Cause and Effect". Without this principle Science is not possible. Thomas Aquinas also developed this concept, we are talking about two of the greatest Philosophers in the history of Western thought. They deserve to be studied and
Kylyssa, what the scientists do say is that their Atheism is the only thing that can be taught in the public schools at Christian taxpayers expense at that there can be no mention that there are other explanations by other scientists and other people. Only 10% of the American population believes in Atheist evolution.
No one has proven the bible wrong. Science is not the proof that God doesn't exist. It is the discovery of how God does things. And for every question we answer opens another laundry list of questions. For everything there has to be a creator. From the chair I am sitting on to the design of the universe, the world, a blade of grass, the “simple cell†(which is like a New York City that reproduces itself), to the atom. All proof that there is a God and it is outside the Bible. But it is in the Bible Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
The question of why we are here boogles my mind. Hebrew Bible says (who knows what it said, translated so many times from one language to another) "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." Sounds like there was more than one god/creator. If you read the book of Genisis a bit more, you read about other humans on the earth in addition to Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel. Do peole who use the Bible as their source for "facts" ever wonder how many children Adam and Eve had and who their children had sex with to procreate? Insest! Oh my, ban the book!.
I really enjoyed this, kitten. Why is it so difficult for folks to imagine the Universe (which is real) as infinitely existing, yet they're perfectly comfortable with an imaginary god being infinitely existing? Quantum mechanics does, in fact, prove that the components of matter itself can come from nothing. Quantum mechanics is ripping this creationists argument to shreds.
You are correct. Some people feel threatened and they lash out, which is not good. Scientists do not go evangelizing in churches, but I could argue that science can hold their own religious-like indocrination services in the classroom. If views that are designated "religious" show up, they are scorned by some as not being real science. The problem is that the word "science" is still relatively new in the history of mankind and theoretically it is supposed to be about inquiry into every possibility, no matter how farfetched. Both science and the church are guilty of being close-minded.
But no one needs to defend their faith against those ideas and theories! The scientists who came up with the Big Bang theory didn't go evangelizing in churches saying their theory means your religion is bunk nor did the scientists that came up with Evolutionary theory. Religious folk heard the theories and decided to feel threatened by them. It's much like how religious people heard Galileo's theories and decided to feel threatened by them.
I will agree with you that people arrive at some of their conclusions by faith. Keep in mind that if you ask them to defend their faith with your form of logic, it is the same as someone asking you to defend your logic with faith. In other words, is your logic perfect? I'm guessing you will say 'no.' If I ask you to defend your logic, you might suggest to me that it makes sense to you. That's fine because that is how we operate as humans. However, does that mean that you are putting a certain level of faith in your ability to deduce a logical conclusion?
*sigh* Do you ever feel like you are making a rational argument that will never be heard by the people who could actually benefit from it? Thanks for trying, though, Kylyssa. I hope one day you cause at least one person to think to themselves that maybe what they think they know isn't quite right.