by Keith Kenney

Something cannot come from a state of nonexistence that has nothing to work upon it. The idea of nothing is absolute. There must be something to make something out of nothing. For this reason, nothing can bring itself into existence. So we know that each thing must be contingent on something for it’s existence. Then perhaps there is a continual string of contingent beings bringing into existence other contingent beings. An illogical probability, one that I find neither rational nor satisfying, for there must be a beginning.

We are left with a Being whom is not contingent upon the existence of another being for it’s own existence. While difficult to grasp, this is more logically probable. Some shirk at the word Being (meaning entity), yet have no trouble explaining the Universe as existing or agreeing upon an impersonal Force that exists.

Let us begin by examining the Universe as existing. The natural order of the Universe is not a function of the Universe. It is separate from the Universe and does not create the Universe. It is at the same time dependent upon the Universe for without matter, there is no motion, gravity, etc. Yet the Universe resides within this natural order. The Universe is dependent upon the natural order that governs it to exist. They are therefore mutually dependent (i.e., contingent) upon the existence of each other.

So the Universe cannot be that God which we seek, for God by definition is that Being which is not contingent upon anything for Its existence, from which all other things exist. The very nature of God is existence.

Knowing that God exists, God could not have not existed, nor could God cease to exist since all other things in existence are contingent upon God’s Own existence. God is therefore eternal.

The natural order of the Universe are those laws which govern the Universe (i.e., time, physics, contingency or Laws of Causation, etc.). Then God is outside of time (eternal), outside of contingency by definition. It follows that God is outside of physics.

For example, no heavenly body (i.e., stars, planets, and moons) puts itself in motion. For it is fundamental that an object in motion must be put in motion by an outside force. Remember though, that these laws are contingent on the Universe for their existence. Since God exists before the Universe, and the natural order (Laws of Nature) is contingent upon the Universe’s existence for it’s own, then God exists before these laws.

If God exists outside of these laws, then God’s existence is not affected by these laws, for God is not contingent upon them. This includes time, physics, contingency or Laws of Causation.

By Universe I do not mean this, the only physical Universe. I choose universe as the object of explanation instead of man, atoms, matter, protons, etc. Partly because the universe is a larger object, partly because I did not want to use man, for that would have invited creation vs. evolution arguments, but mostly because I meant by universe, all matter from the smallest element to the largest supernova.

As for there being other universes, it depends on your view of the universe as perhaps no more than a mere solar system in the scheme of things, or perhaps as a mere atom. Intriguing to contemplate, yet still we are forced to consider whether everything came from a state of nonexistence with nothing in it to get it from nothing, or an infinite line of caused things caused by other things.

And the neutrino god doesn’t cut it as the concept of God: that which is not contingent on anything for it’s existence from which all things come. It just changes the perception of our view from that of a person to that of a particle of an atom; it does not eliminate the validity of the argument, (or rather the possibility).

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.