The Non-existence of God
Is it possible to prove or disprove God's existence? Arguments for the existence of God have taken many different forms over the centuries: in The Non-Existence of God, Nicholas Everitt considers all of the arguments and examines the role that reason and knowledge play in the debate over God's existence. He draws on recent scientific disputes over neo-Darwinism, the implication of 'big bang' cosmology, and the temporal and spatial size of the universe; and discusses some of the most recent work on the subject, leading to a controversial conclusion.
What people are saying - Write a review
I'd like to make a 1,683-word comment. First, on a certain phrase in this article: "human beings are like God". Then I'd like to put forward my hypothesis (with scientific references, of course) that the universe doesn't merely consist of trillions of galaxies, but that both the space and time of the universe are literally infinite.
human beings are like God
"Many religions, from Hinduism to Gnostic Christianity to Mormon doctrine, teach that – as impious as it may sound – it is the goal of humans to become gods." ["Pale Blue Dot – A Vision of the Human Future in Space” by Carl Sagan - Headline Book (1995, p. 382)]. A name used for God in the Old Testament is Elohim, which means the “plural majesty of the one god” i.e. the billions of earth’s inhabitants* entangled** with, and dispersed throughout, the united infinity of the universe and eternity of time. Such entanglement suggests extrasensory perception and telekinetic independence from technology are possible (and that there is truth in practices like astrology), despite modern science’s objections which appear to be based on non-unification.
* Plus the inhabitants of countless billions of other worlds that will be colonized in the past and far future as well as the present and near future by humans who have adapted to, or been genetically engineered to fit, other worlds as they explore the universe. Any complicated form of life – humanoid, animal or plant – anywhere in space would have to evolve into existence, unless human biotechnology and genetic engineering of future centuries produced it. The evolution proposed by Charles Darwin is indeed wonderful, and the Miller-Urey Experiment of 1952 made amino acids (which are relatively simple, and are the building blocks of protein) from inorganic material and by natural causes in a lab. Indeed, many molecules – including sugars and amino acids – have been found in space. But evolution appears limited. In a biological sense, the Theory of Evolution certainly explains adaptations and modifications in large forms of life. But believing it also explains their origins is unwarranted extrapolation. It takes an idea that accounts for some parts of life and, since it’s the only scientific explanation we currently have, assumes it accounts for all parts of life. Any large lifeform is far more advanced than any amino acid. It appears impossible for a collection of amino acids and other molecules to spontaneously develop into the incredible complexity of a large lifeform (even in innumerable tiny steps taken over billions of years).
** To be more specific - the existence of both advanced waves (which travel backwards in time) and retarded waves (which travel forwards in time) as admissible solutions to James Clerk Maxwell's equations about electromagnetism was explored in the Wheeler–Feynman absorber theory in the first half of last century, as well as the more recent transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics (TIQM). Einstein's equations say gravitational fields carry enough information about electromagnetism to allow Maxwell's equations to be restated in terms of these gravitational fields. This was discovered by the mathematical physicist George Yuri Rainich ("Transactions of the American Mathematical Society" 27, 106 - Rainich, G. Y. - 1925). Therefore, gravitational waves also have a "retarded" component and an "advanced" component. They can travel forward or backward not only in space, but in time too. 17th century scientist Isaac Newton's idea of gravity acting instantly across the universe could be explained by gravity's ability to travel back in time, and thereby reach a point billions of light years away not in billions of years, but apparently instantly.^
^ Instantaneous effect over large distances is known as the entanglement of quantum mechanics, and has been repeatedly verified experimentally. If it involves gravitational waves forming matter particles (which form macroscopic
Reasoning about God
The need to appeal to reason
The claim that it is wrong to appeal to reason
The claim that there are no relevant reasons
The claim that reasons are inconclusive
Whether someone has good reasons v whether there are good reasons
The variety of reasons
Theism and its more specific varieties atheism agnosticism
Alstons appeal to mystical perceptual practice
Assessment of Alston
The oddity of experiencing God
A more liberal conception of experience?
Naturalism evolution and rationality
Assessment of the argument
Plantingas attack on classical foundationalism
The alternative view proposed by Reformed Epistemology
Descartes and the ontological argument
Plantinga and the ontological argument
The MalcolmAnselm version
Where ontological arguments go wrong
Can the ontological argument survive?
The First Cause argument
Can there be an infinity of past events?
Can there be an infinity of past causes?
Does the Big Bang theory help the First Cause argument?
The Argument from Contingency
Assessment of the Argument from Contingency
Can there be an explanation of the existence of the universe?
Has science discovered why the universe exists?
The argument from order as such
the argument from the kind of order
flora and fauna
Humean criticisms of the argument to design
The relevance of Darwin
Criticisms of Darwin
Modern defences of the argument to design
Arguments to and from miracles
Assessment of Humes argument
Two arguments for saying that violation miracles are impossible
Assessment of these arguments
God and morality
God as our creator
the Euthyphro dilemma
The Kantian argument
Trethowan and apprehending morality as apprehending God
The supervenience of the moral
What does morality rest on?
an alternative to argument?
Perceptual v nonperceptual experience
Should the Principle of Credulity be accepted?
Can there be privately perceivable objects?
William James and The Will to Believe
The argument from solace
Assessing the argument from solace
Combining consequential and epistemic rationality
Arguments from scale
The argument from scale
modern science is fallible
theism is not committed to what science has disproved
there is a divine purpose in the scale of things
science uses the wrong criterion of significance
God is inscrutable
Problems about evil
The logical problem
Evil as a causal presupposition of good
Evil as logically presupposed by good
Must God create the best possible world?
Must God create a perfect world?
The free will defence
Assessment of the free will defence
The concept of omnipotence
Some possible replies
Can God sin?
Gods lack of a body
Can God destroy himself?
Omnipotence relativised to God
Eternity and omnipresence
The temporal conception of eternity
The temporal conception infinite time and creation
The timeless conception of eternity
Could a timeless God be a creator?
Could a timeless God be a person?
Could we combine the two views of Gods eternity?
Omnipresence and omniscience
Can God foreknow future free actions?
Can God know the truth of indexicals?
An objection to the argument from indexicals
An extension of the argument from indexicals
A revised definition of omniscience