God of the Naturally Insurmountable Abyss

The good old “God of the gaps” argument. I’ve been accused of this and arguing from ignorance numerous times. The assumption is that because science does not know how the universe was formed, then theists assume there is a deity to make up for our ignorance. After all, science has closed many gaps in the past, so there is no reason to believe that science will not also find answers for the other areas we do not understand yet.

 

Science does indeed close many gaps in areas that we do not understand, but what about the gaps that science opens? What about the gaps that keep getting wider the more science learns? What about gaps that are so large that to close them through natural causes requires basic scientific, philosophical, and metaphysical principles to be violated? What about the gaps that give an appearance of design? That is more than a mere gap. It’s an abyss; an abyss that natural causes are unable to cross. I’m not saying “I don’t know; therefore, God”. I’m saying “Natural causes can’t; therefore, God”.



 

So here is my “God of the naturally insurmountable abyss” argument:

1) Everything which begins to exist has a cause.

2) The universe began to exist.

3) Therefore; the universe had a cause.

4) The universe is made of energy, space, and time.

5) Energy, space, and time cannot cause itself to come into being.

6) Therefore; the cause of the universe must be immaterial, spaceless, and timeless.

7) An infinite regress of causes is impossible.

8) Therefore; an uncaused cause must be the cause of our universe.

9) Only abstract objects or an unembodied mind can be immaterial, spaceless, timeless, and uncaused.

10) Abstract objects cannot cause anything.

11) Therefore; the cause of the universe is an unembodied mind.

 

The Kalam Cosmological Argument

 

  

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is a simple argument that establishes that the origin of the universe had a cause.  That is all it establishes.  It does not establish that God is the cause or that God does not need a cause, at least not on the surface.  Making that case requires a few additional steps.

Here is the modern version of the Kalam (by William Lane Craig):

1)      Whatever begins to exist has a cause

2)      The universe began to exist

3)      Therefore, the universe has a cause

The Kalam has the same structure as this accepted logical argument called a Syllogism.

1) All men are mortal

2) Socrates was a man

3) Therefore; Socrates was mortal.

 

Since the conclusion follows logically from the premises, one of the premises must be shown false In order to show that the conclusion is false.  Here’s why the premises are true.

1)      Whatever begins to exist has a cause

Philosophically:  It is a basic metaphysical and philosophical principle that something cannot cause itself to come into being.  There must be an external cause for something to come into existence, regardless of if it is creation from nothing or creation from something.
 

Scientifically:  Causality is a basic scientific principle that has never been falsified.  Science is based on math, logic, and causality.  Take any of those three away and you’ve killed science.

 

2)      The universe began to exist

 

Philosophically:  If the universe did not begin to exist, then it has an infinite past.  The problem with an infinite past is that you never reach the present.  With an infinite past, there is always more time to pass through.  There is no start or point to begin.  It’s like trying to jump in a bottomless pit; you never reach the bottom and have nothing to spring forward from.  Most philosophers consider an infinite regression not to be valid.

 

Scientifically:  All of the evidence we have today supports the Big Bang Theory, which is where the universe began expanding around 13.7 billion years ago.  Our universe has continued to expand.  An expanding universe could not have been expanding forever.  When you hit the rewind button, the expansion can only go back so far.  This is both intuitively truly and has been proven true.  Also, the entropy of our universe has been increasing over time.  This, too, could not have been increasing forever.  If our universe were infinitely old, we should have reached the Heat Death state an infinite time ago.  The Heat Death is predicted by the 2^nd Law of Thermodynamics where will be no more energy available to do work, the stars burn out, and all life ceases.  It’s a lovely future we have in store, but it can only be in the future because there was a beginning.

3)      Therefore, the universe has a cause

Since both premises are true, it follows logically that the universe has a cause.

Again, the Kalam only establishes that the universe has a cause.  Establishing/disproving the possible cause(s) requires more steps.