Contending for the Faith

Universes From Nothing

Three Angels Broadcasting Network

Program transcript

Participants: Clifford Goldstein


Series Code: CFTF

Program Code: CFTF000008

00:21 Hi, Clifford Goldstein here
00:24 Welcome you to Contending for the Faith
00:27 This is part of a series called Faith and Science
00:30 Where we look at questions of well, Faith and science
00:35 And these are important topics to look at
00:38 especially together, because even in the 21st century
00:43 faith remains an important aspect
00:46 an important part of peoples lives
00:49 Though there have been through the ages
00:51 all sorts of prognostications
00:53 about how faith was going to disappear
00:56 from the earth... and all that
00:58 this is hardly the case
01:00 human beings are, at the core
01:04 not just physical beings
01:06 but spiritual beings as well
01:08 we all have spiritual natures
01:11 even if everyone doesn't recognize it as spiritual
01:18 but there's something in us
01:20 that tends to grasp and reach out
01:23 for more than just what we are
01:26 or what we could see
01:28 there's an innate sense in us
01:30 of a reality that transcends the here and now
01:35 well anyway that's a very broad
01:38 definition of the concept of spirituality
01:42 and in many cases though this need
01:44 is expressed by what is commonly known
01:47 as faith or religion, and these have
01:51 certainly not, especially in some parts
01:53 of the world died out as been predicted
01:57 ok it still remains a very important
02:01 force in our lives. I believe that as long as
02:05 human beings exist on earth
02:07 we will be spiritual beings
02:10 In fact if I read my Bible correctly
02:13 my understanding is that spirituality
02:16 is going to exist and be a major
02:18 factor even to the final events of earth's history
02:22 But alas, that's a whole other matter entirely
02:26 at the same time though
02:28 as relevant as faith is
02:30 science has been and is still
02:33 very relevant and flourishing
02:35 It's a powerful force in our lives
02:38 and rightly so I think many many
02:41 human beings alive today
02:43 one degree or another have had their lives
02:46 impacted by science
02:48 Most likely anyone here too
02:51 listening to my words right now
02:53 are looking at my getting torqued out
02:55 face are enjoying many of the fruits
02:58 and benefits of science
03:00 Please our lives are changing at a rapid pace
03:04 due I think more to science than
03:06 than anything else in the world
03:08 Fact if we stop to think about it
03:11 how science has and is impacting your life
03:15 I would say that uh.. that technology has
03:20 no doubt really impacted our lives
03:23 in very very, in very very powerful ways
03:27 and though we can debate whether
03:30 its been positive or negative
03:31 I think, and that's not where I wanna go
03:34 though I think from most points its been positive
03:37 that's my, my point. My point is
03:40 that religion, like faith, remains a
03:43 that science like faith remains a
03:47 very powerful force in human existence
03:50 and that's why I've been doing this series
03:53 to begin with. Because we have
03:55 two potent forces in the world today
03:57 Faith and Science
03:59 and sometimes they work in powerful
04:01 harmony with each other
04:02 Ok since the advent of what we call science
04:05 which was actively the term scientist
04:09 itself was coined by a man named William Yule
04:12 in 1834,there has been very little discord between the two
04:17 despite the idea that all through the centuries
04:20 science and faith have been clashing
04:23 That is kind of a myth
04:24 In fact, I don't want to back down
04:27 bog down into this now
04:28 but some have argued that it was
04:31 only in the context of faith only in the context of belief
04:36 in a divine creator that science
04:39 could've arisen in the first place
04:41 ok and that's because there is this foundational idea
04:45 in Science that there is a rational
04:48 a rational world out there to discover
04:52 and I use that term very broadly
04:55 because in the quantum the area of quantum physics
04:59 the word rational takes on a whole new meaning
05:04 it's not the way we traditionally understood it
05:07 anyway, it was thought at the heart of all science
05:11 lies the idea that the universe is orderly
05:15 because if it weren't, if it were all chaos and confusion
05:19 then how could we really do science?
05:21 The earliest scientists sometimes called natural
05:24 philosophers worked from the idea that they were
05:27 discovering the handiwork of God
05:30 one 20th century Welsh scientist John Halton wrote:
06:03 But the question is why should the world be orderly?
06:06 or rational enough to be subject to our scrutiny
06:10 to begin with? The mere idea of this has
06:13 that this is how it is has made science possible
06:18 And for many reason, for many people the only reason that it
06:22 is orderly or can be orderly is because God had created
06:28 No question, the idea that from the start
06:32 closed minded religionists have been hampering the
06:36 pursuit of truth through science
06:38 is really it's a modern myth
06:41 and the truth is really much much more complicated than that
06:48 for many people, myself included
06:52 science has made if anything has made us marvel at the power
06:57 at the power of the creator God
06:59 David wrote 'the heavens declare the glory of God
07:03 David wrote this. This was a man that didn't have a clue
07:07 about the size and the grandeur and the majesty of the cosmos
07:13 He never looked through a telescope
07:15 He never saw an island galaxy
07:17 Science has opened up so much grandeur, so much complexity
07:22 so much wonder, to me it all shouts with undeniable power
07:27 about the reality of God
07:29 And I guess it did to Paul too
07:33 who wrote the following. Listen to this
07:38 This is Paul, don't blame me
08:16 No question. Science and faith have worked very well together
08:23 But not always. And this is what I wanted to look in today
08:27 as one area where they haven't
08:29 at least not in recent times
08:31 and this has to do in the area of origin
08:34 the origins of the universe and the origins of humanity
08:38 Because they are of course, linked
08:40 Here's where there's been a great divide between science
08:44 and, and faith. Particularly Biblical faith
08:47 And that's what I wanna look at in this program
08:50 You know for most of human history
08:55 people could look around at the created world
09:00 and see evidence of a creator or creators of some kind
09:05 I mean it's just uh uh our world itself screams
09:10 seems to scream out design
09:12 we could see it in the flowers we could see it in the trees
09:15 we could see it in the animals we could see it in the cell
09:18 we could see it in human beings and fish, cats and butterflies
09:22 in the atom and the carbon molecules
09:25 everywhere we can see it
09:28 you know by analogy my iPhone sure looks designed, doesn't it?
09:34 Well in the same way my dog, my big old German Shepherd
09:39 she looks designed too. In fact I think there's a lot more
09:43 design and more intricacy in my dog than in my iPhone
09:47 Thus, I look at my dog and I see design
09:51 And design almost by the very term itself design
09:56 means that somewhere out there there was a designer
10:01 There's a name for this argument
10:03 it's called the Teleological argument from the Greek word
10:07 Telos which means purpose or in purpose
10:11 Things are designed for a reason
10:13 ok, the design is built in. So whatever it is an octopus eye
10:19 an Eagle's wing, a cell wall, a human nose, all are designed
10:24 because they have a goal, a purpose, a teleo
10:28 The octopus eye is there for the octopus to see
10:31 The eagle's wings are there so the eagle can fly
10:35 a cell wall for all the purposes a cell wall has
10:39 such as holding the cell together
10:41 and the human nose is there so that humans can smell
10:46 All these are a Telios, they are a purpose ok. That's what they
10:54 were designed for. Well that's been one argument for God
11:00 And there's another argument and it goes back a long way as well
11:05 It's been called the cosmological argument
11:09 And the essence of the argument is this
11:12 is that nothing that was created had created itself
11:18 Again, nothing that was created created itself
11:23 Notice I said nothing created as opposed to something uncreated
11:30 created itself. There is a big difference here
11:33 and one we should not miss. Anything that once didn't exist
11:38 but then came into existence had to come into existence
11:43 from something before it, something that preceded it
11:47 and also created it. That's just simple down to earth logic
11:53 common sense. Something that does not exist
11:56 cannot create itself, because to create itself
12:00 it would have to already exist
12:02 and if it already existed, then it couldn't didn't create itself
12:06 instead something else had to create it
12:10 and whatever created it, that was created by something else
12:15 and something else created it before and you go on and on
12:19 and you keep going back till you get something that always
12:25 existed something that always was and what else who else could
12:32 that be but God. The God depicted in the Bible
12:35 And without Him nothing made, nothing created none of those
12:41 things that were made, created were created without Him
12:46 So you see there's a radical difference, a radical
12:50 distinction between what always existed, what always was
12:54 and what came into existence
12:57 and God the creator always was
13:01 and He's radically different from the creation
13:05 that which once didn't exist but now does
13:09 Anyway, this had always been a powerful argument
13:13 for the creator, for the one who created all things
13:18 that once didn't exist but now do
13:21 Now what's fascinating is that science in recent years
13:27 has taken paths that it claims
13:30 pretty much refutes both these arguments
13:34 and that's what I want to look at
13:36 the claims of science that it can refute these arguments
13:40 if that were true, then two of the oldest and I think most
13:44 powerful arguments in favor of God's existence
13:48 are then refuted by science
13:52 And for many people, as I've said before on other shows
13:56 if science says something, if science refutes something
14:00 about their faith what is that person but to do
14:03 but to accept what science says
14:06 that's at least the argument that many believe
14:09 and I want to look at that idea as well
14:11 because if you've been following this series
14:14 you'll know just how false and misleading
14:17 that whole concept really, really is
14:21 Anyway, what I want to start out with is
14:24 the Teleological argument, the argument from design
14:27 Now you might think it would be more logical to start out with
14:30 the cosmological argument and then come to that but
14:33 I think you'll see why I want to take the paths that I am
14:38 Now the argument from design
14:40 As I said, for most of human history
14:44 people looked around the world and saw design
14:47 they saw beauty, they saw what looked like Telios
14:51 a Telios and so they just didn't believe it was all thrown
14:55 together by chance. They thought this was evidence of God
14:59 Well then along comes old Charlie Darwin and the
15:03 theory of evolution and soon many people, for many people
15:07 the whole idea of design, the whole idea of a Telios
15:12 was being cast aside. Things only look like their design
15:17 they merely give the appearance that they are designed
15:21 But they aren't, Instead we are taught through a long process
15:26 of natural selection and random mutation
15:29 all that life that exists today came into existence
15:34 it's all we were assured products of these two cold and
15:38 unconscious, purposeless forces Random mutation and natural
15:43 selection. I mean this is where science has taken us
15:47 At least according to how many people understand science
15:51 The whole idea of design or I should say conscious design
15:55 was being thrown out despite the rather obvious fact that
16:00 every living thing from a single celled critter to a human being
16:05 sure looked fantastically complex
16:09 However also in the past 30 some years
16:13 a new phenomena has risen
16:15 they're called anthropic coincidences
16:18 they're from the Greek word anthropos
16:20 but notice the other word coincidences
16:22 that's kind of a loaded word. But that's a whole other issue
16:26 But I don't want to get into it
16:27 But anyway the point is that science is finding these
16:31 incredible fine tune in nature
16:35 There's all this fine tuning. It's often been described like
16:39 this, Imagine a machine with 30 dials on it
16:43 only these dials are refined down to tiny little
16:47 billionth, you can turn a knob to the billionth
16:50 Now these dials represent the crucial fundamental constants
16:55 that are needed for nature and they're all there
16:59 in a certain way. If one of these dials were tweaked
17:01 even the slightest bit, life we know couldn't exist.
17:06 hence they get the word anthropic for man
17:09 Ok and its the whole idea that the whole universe is created
17:13 for man or mankind. Anyway
17:15 the problem with the anthropic coincidence,
17:19 or the problem that these things bring up
17:22 is that these numbers just seem too small, too fantastic
17:28 to have happened by chance alone
17:31 I mean these scientists see these mind blowing ratio
17:35 and suddenly the idea of this occurring by chance
17:39 becomes mathematically impossible
17:41 It just doesn't seem possible
17:43 how this could, these ratios of these dials,
17:47 for these fundamental constants the slightest tweaking
17:50 and life, human life couldn't exist
17:54 ok, it becomes mathematically impossible
17:57 Well, it seems that science has come to the rescue again.
18:04 in a way that can explain this amazing anthropic coincidences
18:10 coincidences without a creator
18:12 Ok that's a concept that arose and it's called the multi verse
18:18 This is opposed to the Universe
18:23 Yes, uni - one universe. The Multiverse means that
18:27 that there are many universes. Yes we are now being told that
18:31 our universe, this vast cosmos
18:34 that we can barely wrap our minds around
18:37 this is just one of an impossibly infinite number of
18:42 universes out there. Now I'm not even going to try to fake
18:46 understanding, you know saying that I understand the
18:49 theoretical physics behind it
18:52 But there is this idea now, presently popular
18:55 which talks about how our universe has been expanding
18:59 when it was first created. They call it inflation and supposedly
19:04 there is some theoretical evidence for it
19:07 And the idea is that as the universe expanded and created
19:11 it just got so big that it started to spawn other bubble
19:15 universes which inflated into more universes
19:18 and on and on and on this kind of internal creation inflation
19:23 creating we're told an infinite number of universes
19:28 This is right now the theory du jour
19:32 what it will be like you know in ten years, who knows?
19:36 The fact is that we have not seen any physical evidence
19:39 of these, of even one more universe
19:41 we barely know what's in ours It's speculation
19:45 at the highest level. But now, whether this inflationary model
19:51 is correct, I don't know
19:52 But really, and whether or not it leads to other universes
19:56 I don't know. I tend to be very skeptical
19:59 But whether it does or not, its now being touted
20:03 as a way out of the Teleological argument
20:06 I mean if you have an infinite number of universes
20:09 out there, then its not unlikely that one of them
20:12 could end up like ours as finely tuned as it is
20:15 for human beings. Look at it like this.
20:19 If someone shuffles a deck of cards one time
20:23 what are the odds that they're going to pull out 4 aces
20:26 in a row if they do it one time?
20:29 Well I don't know, it's pretty slim
20:31 But however, if they shuffle the cards billions and billions
20:35 of times, then sooner or later someone is bound to pick 4 aces
20:40 you know it's not impossible. In fact it's probably likely to
20:44 happen. Well that's the argument with the multiverse
20:48 Ok. Now this theory wasn't as far as I know designed
20:54 specifically to respond to the question of, wasn't devised
20:59 devised specifically to respond to the question of design
21:02 you know. But it's sure been used by some to try to answer it
21:07 Sure, the bottom line is it might be hard
21:10 to understand how one universe like ours could turn out as
21:15 fine tuned as it did to make human life here
21:19 But on the other hand if you have billions of universes out
21:23 there like ours, then surely its likely that something like ours
21:28 would turn up. Anyway that's what's happening here in science
21:32 here science being used to try and justify
21:36 really what is a metaphysical position
21:39 A philosophical assumption that is not scientific
21:43 I have said before that we need to understand that
21:46 not everything coming under the name of science
21:49 really is science. In fact I would argue that it can never
21:53 only be science. There are pre there are philosophical
21:57 pre suppositions always involved
22:00 Anyway, the bottom line is even if one accepts this multiverse
22:05 even if one accepts that there are really millions and billions
22:09 and maybe an infinite number of universes out there
22:13 then we still got the question how did the multiverse
22:17 get started. I mean
22:24 How did the process start that allowed for these
22:27 infinite number of universes to be created, to begin?
22:31 Well they claim they have an answer for that as well
22:36 And that answer is that listen to this:
22:40 that nothing created the universe!
22:44 or if you will, nothing created the multiverse
22:49 I'm not kidding you! There's a popular theory now
22:52 spouted by all sorts of scientific luminaries
22:56 the popular theory spouted by them is that our universe
23:01 and hence all the universes arose out of nothing at all
23:08 and really, in many ways that's the most logical argument
23:11 these people have if you're gonna reject
23:14 the idea of a creator God
23:16 American physicist Lawrence Krause wrote a book
23:20 called "A Universe From Nothing"
23:24 I read it and he goes to great lengths to argue that our
23:28 universe or even the multiverse all arose out of nothing
23:33 In his best selling book assured history of nearly everything
23:39 Author Bill Bryce wrote the following:
23:54 Evident proof huh?
23:56 What a powerful and self evident self truth that is
23:59 Surprising that it took humans this long to come up with it
24:03 Even the man considered by many the greatest scientist alive
24:07 Stephen Hawking has argued the same thing
24:11 Hawking wrote "because there is such a thing as
24:14 the law of gravity, the universe can and will create itself
24:19 out of nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is
24:23 something rather than nothing
24:25 why the universe exists, why we exist"
24:29 Now as silly as all this is
24:32 there's a logical reason for this argument
24:36 and it has nothing to do with science
24:39 Remember when we talked about the cosmological argument?
24:43 Nothing created itself. Anything that once didn't exist
24:47 but came into existence had to come from something before it?
24:50 and then something before it and on and on and on
24:53 and then you get back to finally something that
24:57 always existed and who or what else could that be
25:00 but the God of the Bible
25:03 He alone doesn't need an explanation for how He got there
25:08 and that's because He always existed
25:11 Now, the only other option
25:14 the only other source of our origins
25:16 that doesn't need an explanation
25:19 would be the idea that if nothing created the universe
25:24 right? If nothing created the universe,
25:27 if nothing is the source of all existence
25:30 then there's no deeper explanation
25:33 After all it is nothing. So there is no need to assume
25:37 anything before it that could explain where it came from
25:40 nothing in nothing that doesn't mean anything prior to
25:45 explaining Thus, the idea of nothing as an alternate, as an
25:50 alternative to an eternal existing God really is the only
25:57 logical and rational alternative. And that's because
26:02 only two things in the cosmological argument don't need
26:06 anything to explain where they came from
26:10 The first ok, only two things don't need anything to explain
26:15 The first thing is an eternal existing God
26:20 nothing explains it because God was always there
26:23 He always existed.
26:25 so the first thing that doesn't need an explanation
26:28 to explain Him is the eternal existing God
26:32 The second thing is Nothing
26:36 Nothing does not need an explanation either
26:41 So which do you think is more logical?
26:48 Nothing created the universe
26:50 or a self existing God created the universe
26:57 Now, the reason I bring these two points up
27:02 the multiverse and nothing
27:04 Is really to show this idea of pure, of science
27:09 as purely rational and objective is a myth
27:12 And in these two cases we could see where science
27:16 exceedingly speculative science
27:19 is at time bordering on what I would deem science fiction
27:25 we're seeing it being used to promote
27:27 what's definitely a non scientific agenda
27:31 in this case it's the whole idea to refute God's existence
27:36 Again, I don't think these were conjured up for this purpose
27:40 or maybe they were but they're used
27:42 being used to promote that agenda
27:45 so look at the extremes...
27:47 either that science is using us to get away from God
27:50 life arose from nothing or from an infinite number of universes
27:55 wouldn't a supernatural creator be a logical explanation
28:00 as opposed to these other scientific options?


Revised 2015-02-26