“Four Big Bangs” That Kill Atheism

 

October 15, 2018 Daniel Currier 

 

In a recent conversation with an atheist, I challenged him with four major topics his worldview can’t explain. I remembered them by using Frank Pastore's nice mental hook, the “four big bangs” that materialism can’t explain.

 1.    The “Cosmological Big Bang”

 2.    The “Biological Big Bang”

 3.    The “Psychological Big Bang”

 4.    The “Moral Big Bang”

 When atheists try to explain these away, there seems to be much hand waving and “just so” stories. I love lines like, “sure, we don’t know, but at least we’re humble because we admit we don’t know” or “at least we don’t believe in the God of the gaps.”

 But I digress, each of these four items are predicated upon something, almost magically, the popping into existence of things when the wheel of time is spun.

  

                    1) The “Cosmological Big Bang”

 

This is the most fundamental issue the materialists struggle to explain. I want to be clear, I’m not talking about when the universe started to exist, rather that it did start to exist. Things are much more likely not to exist than to exist. They can’t explain why.

 This “just so story” sounds like this: the universe popped into existence, like “poof”, and then expanded through eons of time. Sometimes the claim is that there was nothing and that nothing turned into everything, as in “no thing” or “not anything” caused it all. Nothing is actually what rocks think about. That radical view takes much faith, more than I can muster. Really, are you afraid a pink elephant just appeared in your fridge and now is eating your salad?

 Others say “nothing” means “something.” Don’t worry if this misnomer confuses you, the rest of us are confused too. If it’s “something,” please stop calling it “nothing,” right? They say this “nothing” was a singularity, or “all the matter in the universe smashed into an incredibly hot, infinitely dense speck of matter.” Or was this “nothing” some sort of quantum vacuum?

 The problem becomes exponentially worse when we understand that the universe is finely tuned. To explain what I mean by fine tuning, think of the International Space Station, or even your car, mower, vacuum or microwave. Even the simplest of these are finely tuned. Many things need to be just right or else the machine does not work. There are many more ways for machines not to work than to work.

 The universe is no different, except for it is exponentially more finely tuned, the most complex structure known. So many constants need to be just right. If not, the universe, all the elements, our solar system, our sun and our earth would not exist. In addition, life on earth would not exist if these constraints were not tuned to be just right.

 Examples of some of these constants include things like the strength of the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force and the gravitational constant.

 

 Scientist and agnostic Robert Jastrow, says this in “The Enchanted Loom”:

 

“Now we see how the astronomical evidence supports the Biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and Biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy.”

 

We may disagree with some of his thoughts, but his main point is true; the evidence points to the biblical God. Simply put, from our experience, nothing ever makes something. Everything that begins to exist had a prior cause. Also, the fine tuning of the universe, like carburetors, cars and chainsaws, points to a fine tuner. Finely tuned things ultimately have an intelligent cause.

                          2) The “Biological Big Bang”

 

First dead matter, then alive matter, that’s the problem. Am I just to believe that a “poof,” composed of eons of time, created life? We could talk about the debunked “spontaneous generation” hypothesis from history to the modern “abiogenesis” version, but both have the same issue, lacking evidence.

 Paul Davies, a well-known Astrobiologist, says this, “One of the great mysteries of life is how it began. What physical process transformed a nonliving mix of chemicals into something as complex as a living cell?” In a conversation on the Unbelievable radio show, he said we have no naturalistic theory for the origin of life. Anyone who has studied the origin of life will tell you the same. Life always comes from life. Life from non-life is a dead end, pardon the pun.

 Also, you remember the fine tuning of the universe, right? Well, life too is finely tuned. From finely tuned cells, to finely tuned molecular machines, to finely tuned DNA code, to finely tuned molecules and all way to the finely tuned elements, life and its building blocks are finely tuned! Again, fine-tuned things have an intelligent cause.

 In addition, life’s microscopic machines are real machines, not metaphors. In biology, we find gears and motors, turbines and generators. These types of machines, from our experience, are always designed. 

 We must not forget the information contained in the cells. Again, from our universal experience, meaningful and functional information like this always comes from minds.

  

3) The “Psychological Big Bang”

 The question is simple, how did consciousness arise? From a bacteria like cell, to a blob brain, to a mind?

 Somehow we acquired the capacity for creativity and consciousness, design and beauty, self-awareness and self-reflection. From proverbs to poems, to meaning and methods, to emotions and economics.

 We have mental abilities, and complementary physical abilities that other organisms don’t have. We love beauty, love the arts and love music. In addition to beauty appreciation, we can make it too.

 We can do complex mathematics; we have a complex language and we have the ability to create complex technology.

 Our technology, as a whole, not only needs intelligent minds to dream and design, but also proper bodies to create. But there is another level too, that is the topic of fire. Most of our technology requires fire in manufacturing. Very few things, if any, were created without the help of fire.

 Here is the interesting part, we are the only creatures on earth that can use fire. Not only do our minds have the ability, but we also have the proper body to make and interact with fire.

 Greased with the ingredient of eons of time, this all seems so much like a fairy-tale for grownups!

                         4) The “Morality Big Bang”

 Let me get this straight, we were some type of amoral animals, and through another poof of evolutionary generations, we now possess moral sensibilities? Why is it wrong for one Bag-O-Chemicals to bump off another Bag-O-Chemicals? Why is it wrong to torture babies for the fun of it, and right to treat them kindly?

 If our main purpose on earth is to just pass down our genes to the next generation, as many Darwinists say, why the “me too” movement and why is rape so wrong? Oh, am I not supposed to bring up that conundrum? Why do we know those things are bad, wrong and evil? Why is it more wrong for one to try to trip someone maliciously and fail than for one to accidentally trip another? Who cares?

 

In an atheistic universe, there is no ultimate morality, except for pragmatic reasons. The only reason we do what is “right” is because it helps us. But that does not make things good or evil! And the “it just helps me” line seems quite selfish, so why would that be good?

 

And why is it a good thing to pass on our genes to the next generation? First, who cares if our genetics are passed on or not passed on? Second, the point seems quite circular. It’s good because it’s good. We are reusing moral language to explain the existence of morality.

                 The Monstrous Mountain to Climb

 

Again, each of these four “big bangs” point to God. They are a monstrous mountain to climb, and when the atheist scientist scales them…well, let me quote Robert Jastrow again from his work God and the Astronomers.

 “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”

  St. Bonaventure wrote in the 13th century that the many species on Earth give insight into God.

Bishop Robert Grossteste, an Englishman, wrote the steps of scientific method in the 13th century and is one of the first western thinkers to argue that natural phenomenon can be described mathematically.

About the same time, Franciscan Father Roger Bacon became among the first thinkers to use experiments.

Nicolaus Copernicus, who died in 1543 having posited a heliocentric universe, was a Polish deacon. He is credited with inventing modern astronomy.

Venerable Cardinal Cesare Baronius, wrote before his death in 1607, "The Bible was written to show us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go."

Father Nicholas Zucchi, a 17th century Italian Jesuit, invented the reflecting telescope.
Another Jesuit of the period, Father Francesco Lana-Terzi, is considered the father of aeronautics.

A Danish priest is considered the founder of geology and an 18th century Croatian Jesuit, Father Roger Boscovich, is considered the father of modern atomic theory.

It was the Jesuits who brought quinine to the world to treat malaria and another Jesuit, Father Angelo Secchi, is a hero of astrophysics, having been the first to classify stars based on their spectra, a feat carried off in the 19th century.

Augustinian Father Gregor Mendel was a 19th-century Austrian credited with pioneering in genetics. Holy Cross Father John Zahm, the man who helped Archbishop Alexander Christie found the University of Portland, was a celebrated physicist and pioneer thinker on faith and evolution.

Father Zahm, born a farm boy in 1851, was ordained in 1875 and soon showed his love for science. In 1879, he helped Notre Dame become the nation's first electrified campus.

In 1883, he began to think about evolution. By 1896, he wrote a book saying that God was grand enough to use chance as a secondary cause of continuing creation. That got Father Zahm in hot water then, but he was vindicated. His book on evolution was republished in the 1970s and by 1996, Pope John Paul echoed Zahm's thinking.

The Big Bang theory and the idea of the primeval atom are credited to a Belgian priest and astronomer named Father Georges Lemaître, who died in 1966. Father Lemaître furthered ideas based on Einstein's general theory of relativity.

Seismology, the study of earthquakes, has so many major contributors from the Society of Jesus that it's known as "The Jesuit Science."

On the moon, 35 craters are named after Jesuit scientists and mathematicians.

The Vatican Observatory, run by Jesuit priests, has been a leader in astronomy for centuries and still is.

The church’s dedication to the skies began in the 16th century. That's when Pope Gregory XIII wanted astronomers to revamp the calendar, which had fallen out of sync with heavenly bodies. Observatories near Rome go back to the 18th century and the church has had one in a dark outpost of Arizona since 1995.

The Jesuits who run the Vatican Observatory these days often say that they do not do science to prove their faith. They say their faith improves their science.

It's important the priests put themselves in a place where they can engage science, says Jesuit Father Tom Lankenau, who left Portland for a teaching assignment at Gonzaga Prep in Spokane. If priests are to be men of truth, they cannot ignore scientific truths.

That's what Father Bill Holtzinger has attempted. The pastor of St. Anne Parish in Grants Pass, he is known for his computer know-how but also his thinking on faith and science.

In a talk he gives, he traces the way science developed in Judeo-Christian thought and practice, from Aristotle to the Jesuit astronomers of the Vatican Observatory. He quotes the Benedictine thinker Father Stanley Jaki, who said that only Christians believed that the universe was the rational product of the creator. That came in contrast to the Greeks and Romans, whose gods were capricious.

"If we had a precarious God who was not consistent with himself, we wouldn't even bother with science," says Father Holtzinger, an amateur astronomer.

He tells people that science is about the how and theology is about the why, but both are after the truth.

Father Holtzinger is critical of atheistic scientists who will not even explore the idea of a creator.
"To do good science," he says, "you need to be open to the possibility."

 http://www.catholicsentinel.org

____________________________________________________

Galileo 

Galilei  has been called the "father of modern observational astronomy",^[4] the "father of modern physics",^[5] the "father of science",^[5] and "the Father of Modern Science".^{[6]  (Wikipedia.org)} 
He was a devout Catholic throughout his lifetime.

“I take comfort in the fact that it is a beautiful universe, and we belong here and that we fit.  This is our home.” - Astronomer Sandra Faber, UC Santa Cruz

^{______________________________________________}

^{“I’m not an atheist, and I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God.” -Albert Einstein, as cited in Antony Flew’s book, There Is A God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind.}

^{____________________________________________}

In contrast, Richard Dawkins has earned a fortune writing books promoting atheism in the extremely hateful and unscholarly terms..  Dawkins and his famous atheist ally, Stephen Hawking, are addressed in this lecture given by John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics, of the University of Oxford.

As a direct result of the plague of hateful atheist books and articles, the number of Leftists abandoning their Christian beliefs has exceeded 20% in the last 20 years according to a Gallup survey.

Religious Identification Among Democrats Crashes 20 Points in 20 Years (breitbart.com)

_______________________

Professor John Lennox  brilliant lecture, critiquing atheists such as Richard Dawkins:

 A Matter of Gravity

____________________________________________________________

While we are on the subject of gravity, consider the handy atheist talking point comparing gravity with evolution.  Their automatic rebuttal is:

"Well gravity is only a theory, so if you don't believe that theory either, let's see you jump off a cliff, ha, ha, ha, ha."  Clever, no?  No.  There is quite an alternative perspective.

Atheist:  "Can you see God?  No.
Rebuttal:  Well can you see gravity?  No.  You see only the effects of gravity, just as you see the effects of the Creator.
Atheist:  "Who made God?  If you can't tell who made God, then there is no God."
Rebuttal:  Who made gravity?  If you can't tell who made gravity, then there is no gravity.

Either there is infinite regress, which is inconceivable, or else there is an ultimate Creator, which is plausible as The First Cause, given what we now know about the information inherent in energy, matter, organization, correspondence, and the consummate elegance of their interactions, which surely could not have created themselves out of nothing.

The search for knowledge cannot possibly be limited by arbitrary rules demanding absolute naturalism, which is to say, materialism.  Matter, and organization, and elegant laws cannot conceivably be established and created ex nihilo, which has never been observed on earth anywhere, even once.

_____________________________________


Morality and Goodness

The Catholic Church teaches 3 million students a day, in its more than 250 Catholic Colleges and Universities, in its more than 1,200 Catholic High Schools, and its more than 5,000 grade schools.  No school or college in America has "atheist" in its name.

Every day the Catholic Church feeds, clothes, shelters and educates more people than any other organization in the world.  Additionally, there are Jewish Hospitals, Lutheran Hospitals, Baptist Hospitals, Methodist Hospitals, but strangely enough, given their constant boasts of intellectual and moral superiority, not one atheist hospital.
_____________________________________

Perspective

Scientists did a study on the Norwegian wharf rat.  For the study, the scientists took some of these rats and placed each of them in a tub of water and then continued to spray the tubs so that the rats could not roll over and float on their backs, but rather were forced to swim. The rats ended up dying after just seventeen minutes of swimming, on average .
The scientists then took another set of Norwegian wharf rats and repeated the same exact experiment; only this time, after about sixteen minutes, just as the rats were about to give up, they removed the rats from the tubs, dried them off, placed them in their cages, and fed them; allowing the rats recover for a few days and live a normal rat life again.
After a few days had passed, the rats were put back into the tubs of water under the same conditions as the original experiment.  Only this time, the rats swam for more than thirty seven hours before they drowned. The scientists concluded that the reason the rats were able to endure for a much longer period of time is because they had a “salvation” experience which led them to hope for a repeat of that same salvation experience.  The rats were able to swim thirty-seven hours instead of seventeen minutes because they had hope, the hope of rescue, of being saved.
Understand the importance of the findings of this experiment.  It wasn’t that the 2^nd group of rats was stronger than the first group, or that they were in better physical condition that enabled them to swim for 37 hours instead of 17 minutes, it was that the 2^nd group of rats had hope while the first group had none.

Like the first group of rats, atheists have no hope.