j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 1 What We Mean When We Say, “God Created Everything From Nothing”
Even as an atheist, I understood the challenge offered by the “Standard
Cosmological Model” (the Big Bang Theory) when examined from my
naturalistic worldview. This model infers a “cosmological singularity” in
which all space, time and matter came into existence at a point in the
distant past. In others words, “everything” came from “nothing”. I knew
this presented a problem for me as a naturalist; if the universe had a
beginning, the “principle of causality” inclined me to believe there must
have been a cause. But, what could cause something as vast as the universe?
Could it have caused itself to come into existence, or must the first cause
of all space, time and matter be non-spatial, atemporal and immaterial? How
could “everything” come from “nothing”?
I’ve written about this in my new book, God’s Crime Scene: A Cold-Case
Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe. In this
book, I examine the universe as a “crime scene” and investigate eight
different pieces of evidence through the filter of a simple investigative
question: “Can the evidence ‘in the room’ be explained by staying ‘in
the room’? This question is key to determining whether a death scene is a
crime scene, and I typically play a game I call “inside or outside the room
” whenever I am trying to determine if a death is, in fact, a murder. If,
for example, there is a victim in the room with a gunshot injury lying next
to a handgun, but the doors are locked from the inside, all the DNA and
fingerprints in the room come back to the victim, the gun is registered to
the victim and there are no signs of an outside intruder, this is simply the
scene of a suicide or accidental death. If, however, there exist
fingerprints or DNA of an unknown suspect, the gun does not belong to the
victim, and there are even bloody footprints leading outside the room, I’ve
got to reconsider the cause of this death. When the evidence in the room
cannot be explained by staying inside the room and is better explained by a
cause outside the room, there’s a good chance I’ve got a murder. When this
is the case, my investigation must shift direction. I must now begin to
search for an external intruder. I think you’ll find this investigative
approach applicable as you examine the case for God’s existence. If all the
evidence “inside the room” of the universe can be explained by staying “
inside the room”, there’s no need to invoke an ‘external’ cause. If, on
the other hand, the best explanation for the evidence “inside the room” is
a cause “outside the room”, we’ll need to shift our attention as we
search for an “external” intruder.
One of the key pieces of evidence in the universe is simply it’s origin. If
our universe began to exist, what could have caused it’s beginning? How
did everything (all space, time and matter) come into existence from nothing
? One way atheist physicists have navigated this dilemma has simply been to
redefine the terms they have been using. What do we mean when we say “
everything” or “nothing”? At first these two terms might seem rather self
-explanatory, but it’s important for us to take the time to define the
words. As I’ve already stated, by “everything” we mean all space, time
and matter. That’s right, space is “something”; empty space is part of “
everything” not part of “nothing”. For some of us, that’s an interesting
concept that might be hard to grasp, but it’s an important distinction
that must be understood. When we say “nothing”, we mean the complete
absence of everything; the thorough non-existence of anything at all (
including all space time and matter). These two terms, when defined in this
way, are consistent with the principles of the Standard Cosmological Model,
but demonstrate the dilemma. If everything came from nothing, what caused
this to occur? What is the non-spatial, atemporal, immaterial, uncaused,
first cause of the universe? A cause of this sort sounds a lot like a
supernatural Being, and that’s why I think many naturalists have begun to
redefine the terms.
Lawrence Krauss, Arizona State University Professor (School of Earth and
Space Exploration and Director of the Origins Initiative) wrote a book
entitled, A Universe from Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than
Nothing. As part of the promotion for the book, Krauss appeared on the
Colbert Report where he was interviewed by comedian Stephen Colbert. During
the interview, Krauss tried to redefine “nothing” to avoid the need for a
supernatural first cause:
“Physics has changed what we mean by nothing… Empty space is a boiling,
bubbling brew of virtual particles popping in and out of existence… if you
wait long enough, that kind of nothing will always produce particles.” (
Colbert Nation, June 21st, 2012)
Now if you’re not careful, you might miss Krauss’ subtle redefinition. In
describing the sudden appearance of matter (“particles”), Krauss assumes
the prior existence of space (“empty space”) and time (“if you wait long
enough”). If you’ve got some empty space and wait long enough, matter
appears. For Krauss, the “nothing” from which the universe comes includes
two common features of “everything” (space and time), and something more (
virtual particles). This leaves us with the real question: “Where did the
space, time and virtual particles come from (given all our evidence points
to their origination at the beginning of our universe)?” Krauss avoids this
inquiry by moving space and time from the category of “something” to the
category of “nothing”.
If you’ve got a teenager in your house, you might recognize Krauss’
approach to language. I bet you’ve seen your teenager open the refrigerator
door, gaze at all the nutritious fruits and vegetables on the shelves, then
lament that there is “nothing to eat.”
Teenagers often redefine the term “nothing” in situations such as these.
It’s not that the refrigerator is truly empty; it’s just that your
teenager doesn’t want to acknowledge the value of the stuff that’s in
there. That stuff’s not really food; it’s nothing worth eating, and your
teenager is willing to redefine the term to win the point. Like Krauss, many
naturalists want to redefine the term in order to win the point. But
changing the language won’t eradicate the dilemma. We still have to account
for the sudden appearance of space, time and matter (even if we are simply
talking about “virtual” particles). The Christian worldview provides an
explanation for the cosmological singularity described by the Big Bang
because Christianity proposes an eternal, non-spatial, immaterial, uncaused,
first cause that is capable of creating “everything” from “nothing”.
http://coldcasechristianity.com/2015/what-we-mean-when-we-say-g | z********o
发帖数: 18304 | 2 “圣经”哪里说“God Created Everything From Nothing”？？？
看“圣经”：
1 起初神创造天地。
2 地是空虚混沌。渊面黑暗。神的灵运行在水面上。
那么，至少已经有了水了。 |
|
