Most cosmologists are now reaching the astonishing conclusion that at some time in the distant past there was nothing at all. No stars, no planets, no asteroids, no gases, no chemicals, no elements, no physical matter at all. Nothing. And then a moment later, there was a universe! The evidence of cosmology, philosophy and mathematics all point to a clear, logical conclusion: The universe has not existed forever. It had a beginning. As Dr. Stephen Hawking stated on his website:
“We have made tremendous progress in cosmology in the last hundred years … which has shattered the old picture of an ever-existing and ever-lasting universe. … This is a profound change in our picture of the universe and of reality itself.”
If the universe had a beginning, it raises the question: Who put it there? How can nothing become something unless someone beyond the universe creates it? The cosmological evidence for the universe having a beginning cries out for a supernatural explanation, because only something outside of nature, something “supernatural”, can possibly create nature. Nature cannot create itself out of nothing!
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
The Kalam cosmological argument deals with the issue of ultimate cause. It is a philosophical argument, originating in the Middle Ages, and championed in recent years by apologist and theologian, Dr. William Lane Craig. The original Kalam argument is as follows:
- Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
- The universe began to exist.
- Therefore, the universe has a cause.
William Lane Craig added to the argument:
- That cause must be timeless, immaterial, self-existent and powerful.
- The most reasonable cause is God.
This is a logical argument that, in my opinion, is almost impossible to refute. The universe can’t have created itself, therefore the cause must lie outside of the universe! Of course, there will always remain a core of obdurate atheists who refuse to concede even this clear chain of logic. For example, Dr. Quentin Smith, professor emeritus of philosophy at Western Michigan University, in a debate with William lane Craig, stated:
“The universe came from nothing, by nothing for nothing!”[i]
This, of course is a ludicrous proposition, and it illustrates that some atheists are prepared to believe in the impossible, rather than the supernatural.
A growing number of scientists, however, are concluding that there was something beyond nature that was fundamentally at work in the creation of the universe. In April 2016, Dr. Dan Reynolds wrote:
“All the observable evidence we have about the universe implies it had a beginning … Logically, the universe did not and could not create itself. If the universe (nature) could/did not create itself and it had a beginning, then only something or someone outside of nature can account for the universe’s existence. Genesis 1:1 offers a credible explanation: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”[ii]
Dr Robert Jastrow, astronomer, physicist and founder of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies, stated,
“Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.”[iii]
Similarly, Dr James Clerk Maxwell, physicist and mathematician, who is credited with formulating classical electromagnetic theory and whose contributions to science are considered to be of the same magnitude to those of Einstein and Newton, stated:
“Science is incompetent to reason upon the creation of matter itself out of nothing. We have reached the utmost limit of our thinking faculties when we have admitted that because matter cannot be eternal and self-existent it must have been created.”[iv]
Commenting on the growing number of scientists who now concede that the universe must have had a supernatural cause, astrophysicist, Dr Hugh Ross, Director emeritus of Observations at Royal Astronomical Society, Vancouver, states;
“Astronomers who do not draw theistic or deistic conclusions are becoming rare, and even the few dissenters hint that the tide is against them. Geoffrey Burbidge, of the University of California at San Diego, complains that his fellow astronomers are rushing off to join ‘the First Church of Christ of the Big Bang.’”[v]
In other words, there is a growing tide of scientists at the top of their fields who, when confronted with the mounting cosmological evidence, are conceding that the only logical explanation for the origin of the universe, is that there must have been a supernatural cause. Nature cannot create itself; therefore the cause had to have been something outside of nature – a transcendent “supernatural” cause. This does not mean that all the scientists in the world are suddenly becoming Christians. There is a big step from believing in a supernatural cause of some kind, to believing in the God of the Bible. But for the first time in a long time, a growing chorus of voices within the scientific community has conceded the very real possibility of the existence of supernatural forces that lie beyond the realm of scientific study.
Dr Hugh Ross states;
“All the data accumulated in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries tell us that a transcendent Creator must exist. For all the matter, energy, nine space dimensions, and even time, each suddenly and simultaneously came into being from some source beyond itself. Likewise, it is valid to refer to the Creator as transcendent, for the act of causing these effects must take place outside or independent of them.”[vi]
Of course, this is not the impression that continues to be dished up to us by the media. The humanist movement has a stranglehold on the popular press. Scientists with aggressive atheistic agendas dominate the airwaves, and their well-financed documentaries continue to pump out the message that science has a natural explanation for everything. The impression is given that the new god of science has all the answers sewn up. But scientists who are at the cutting edge of their fields know that this is not so. Those who are studying these things in depth are coming face-to-face with undeniable evidence of a transcendent, supernatural reality that underpins our entire universe. The tide is turning, and it’s not just a trickle. The previously quoted complaint of Dr. Geoffrey Burbidge, of the University of California at San Diego, that his fellow astronomers are “rushing off to join the First Church of Christ of the Big Bang”[vii] indicates how widespread this new spiritual awareness is within the scientific community.
Without a doubt, the science of cosmology provides extremely convincing evidence for the existence of a supernatural creator-God. The extraordinary claim by Richard Dawkins, that “there is not a tiny shred of evidence for the existence of any kind of god”[viii], must surely arise from a wilful determination to ignore the considerable cosmological evidence that has arisen in recent years, and portrays his intransigent unwillingness to even consider the existence of anything beyond the realms of science.
FOR MORE INFORMATION: See my newly released book, “No More Monkey Business: Evolution in Crisis”. This is available as an eBook or paperback from book distributors worldwide. For Australian buyers, the cheapest place to buy it is via my website: SmartFaith.net.
[i] Debate between William Lane Craig and Quentin Smith, https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/debates/does-god-exist-the-craig-smith-debate-2003/
[iv] James Clerk Maxwell; Perspectives on His Life and Work”, Oxford University Press, 2014, p.274
[v] Dr Hugh Ross, “The Creator and The Cosmos”, Navpress, 2001, pp.108-112).
[vi] Dr Hugh Ross, “The Creator and The Cosmos”, Navpress, 2001, pp.108-112).
[vii] Quoted by Hugh Ross, “The Creator and The Cosmos”, Navpress, 2001, pp.108-112
[viii] Richard Dawkins interview, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of-8Q3HySjE&t=44m08s
Whatever is Dawkins to do? Admit he was mistaken. Now that would be a miracle, which I believe is by definition supernatural. Oh dear.
Thanks for the post.
I remember when my thinking opened to the supernatural in my early twenties. It was a scary time. Perhaps I should be more hind to Dawkins. It can be a heroine journey from thinking you understand, to meeting Jesus, to bending your heart to him. Father help us reflect your Son, not in our strength but in that of the Spirit. If it pleases You may Dawkins and may more become Family.
Boy….I started smug. Feeling a bit less now!
Thanks again Kevin.
Thanks for your comment Michael. This post was actually an excerpt from my new book. You might find it interesting.