I have decided to write a series on a particular topic that is argued to the very core. Atheism and Theism. We will leave Pantheism out for this series considering their religion is very much uncommon, especially when it comes to debates on “The Meaning of Life”. We have reached a day and age in time where debates are getting more and more common, especially when it comes to “Religion or the Meaning of Life”. Biologists, Apologists, physicists, and Theologians are now starting to come to grips of the universe, and now want to debate everyone else on the matter. Great Apologists like Ravi Zacharias and Frank Turek are now debating well known Atheists, David Silverman and Christopher Hitchens enter this category. Now we all know that with debates: No side of the table are willingly going to give up there views. So it’s just to see if the crowd can be persuaded in the debate. That we’ll never know. But what I have come to talk about today is what both sides talk about on certain subjects, being Theist or Atheist. I am a Theist and have been for 10 years, but I have decided to look into both views and see if Atheist really do self-defeat their claims(Theistic view) or Theism can’t refute the evidence of Atheism(Atheistic view). Let’s begin.
Causality: “No one created something out of nothing?”
I thought we would start with a very common subject: Causality(Which is Cosmos for some that don’t know). This is a very “Scraping the surface for both sides, or is it?
Frank Turek is a very smart Christian Apologist who by his videos has a very small temper(David Silverman debate to explain that). This was his quote with Causality:
“To doubt the law of causality is to doubt virtually everything we know about reality, including our ability to reason and do science. All arguments, all thinking, all science, and all aspects of life depend on the law of causality” -Frank Turek, Stealing from God
So we have discovered that by Frank’s theory, with Causality, to doubt causality is to totally doubt everything in the real world, Reality. Let’s listen to what Lawrence Krauss who is a Physicist says:
“One of the things about Quantum mechanics is not only can nothing become something, nothing always becomes something. Nothing is unstable. Nothing will always produce something in Quantum mechanics.”-Lawrence Krauss.
So by those two quotes we have gathered two things, Frank claims that without Causality(Cause and Effect) nothing can appear. which is where Theist’ statements come from, “Something created something out of nothing” When Krauss’ view is that by the very science that Frank says falters with out cause and effect, “Nothing can make something out of nothing” Because by his research and Quantum Mechanics, nothing is unstable enough for a reaction to occur.
But it turns out when Frank himself when hearing Krauss’ claim asked him. “What do you mean by “Nothing?” Well apparently Frank found out that it wasn’t nothing. Now I’m not going to rule out Atheism just yet just because of one false claim, let’s hear what Krauss meant when he said nothing.
“A Quantum Vacuum is something- it consists of fields of fluctuating energy from which particles appear to pop in and out of existence. Whether these particles are caused or uncaused is unknown. It could be that they are caused but simply can’t discover or predict how that happens .”
Now Frank went on to say that with Krauss’ statement, there could at least be ten different plausible models of the Quantum level. But wait a second, I’m still going to give the Atheistic view a chance, remember, that’s what Atheist’s go on. Chance. So let’s give them another one shall we.
Does Causality apply outside of Space and Time?
Now when exploring more of Krauss’ theories which are rather interesting. He comes to a point where he talks about the physical cause. By God, he is spaceless, timeless and immaterial. Krauss explains the material Causality which is where only the physical cause can create the physical effect. Now if we use Frank’ theory with this claim he comes up with a syllogism:
1. The Law of Causality only applies to physical things in space-time.
2. The creation of the universe did not occur in space-time. (It was the creation of space-time.)
3. Therefore the law of Causality does not apply to the creation of the universe.
Now by Frank’ calculations, if you look closely at the Syllogism, you figure out that the first claim is already false. For instance, when we look into the actual meaning of Causality it says “the relationship between cause and effect.” Now that could account for anything. If I say a racist thing to someone who is black. The possible effect of that would be the emotion of getting offended. Now that’s obviously not physical. So his first claim goes down in the dumps, these are now two reasons why I shouldn’t have be an Atheist, but I’m sure that Atheism can come back swinging, so let’s continue.
Now you know how you have three strikes you’re out method in baseball, well I have the same Philosophy in my Reasoning for Atheism and Theism. Now I don’t have favorites here even though I’m theist. Even an Atheist said the same thing about his belief. “If you can refute my claim and give a more reasonable explanation than I would be a Theist.”-David Silverman.
Now I had two strikes at the end, but I shall give the third in this conclusion.
Dr. Paul Davies, who is an agnostic on the question of God. He wrote an entry on Science.
Over the years I have often asked my physicist colleagues why the laws of physics are what they are. The answers vary from ‘That’s not a scientific question’ to ‘Nobody knows.’ The favorite reply is, “There is no reason they are what they are- they just are.”-Dr. Paul Davies
And…..You’re out! You see, when you look closely you realize that the scientists have to base their own evidence on faith even more than us, because unlike them, we have hard evidence on our theism, the best answer Atheists can give is “They just are.”
You can’t base your faith on Paper-thin evidence. A Atheist couldn’t use that at a debate, but they do anyway. Don’t be fooled by Atheists, they may be smart, but they’re not reasonable at all. Don’t be blinded by their hollow reasoning and instead research your claims. David Silverman said to Frank Turek during a debate a few years ago. “Theists use the whole God of the gaps theory.” Don’t be blinded by that. We have good reason for our God, and trust me. When you give great reasoning, Atheism will be left in the dust.
See you in part 2 for the real subject: Reason.