[Cal]

Just a couple of follow-up thoughts:

Suppose I'm walking in the country and come across something that looks likes a mechanical device, but one I don't recognize. It seems to be using energy, but I can't be sure what type. But observing it I conclude someone made it. Its characteristics tell me it couldn't have just appeared on its own.

But I don't have to know anything about the creator of it, how he made it, what tools he used, how he found the time or the energy or whatever to make it. All I know is, someone or something APART and OUTSIDE of it made it. The device itself tells me that.

The universe is basically the same. It is physical and so is subject to physical laws, which include that it is limited by time. And as we've seen time had to have a beginning, as an infinite number of moments in the past is not possible, otherwise we could have never reached now. Time is a physical phenomenon, not a metaphysical one. Physicists know that time principles are interwoven with the fabric of the physical universe.

So I don't have to know anything about the Creator of the universe to know he or it exists. Because the universe had to have a cause. All physical phenomenon must have a cause. So it's not necessary to explain how the Creator exists outside of time, because he is not physical and time is a physical characteristic. All we need know is that time, that is time as applies to the physical universe we know, had a beginning, so it had to have a Beginner.


Nothing, really, is provable. Kant was right. The only things we really know are things that are true by definition. We define a circle as "round" so we "know" a circle is round. But this knowledge, no pun intended, is a circle. Everything else is simply our best guess.

But that doesn't mean all ideas are equal. We can use basic common sense to compare ideas and know which ones make more sense. But why even bother? Why do we care? One reason is we want to survive, in all senses. We want to survive physically, mentally, emotionally and even spiritually. We want to be whole, and experience tells us if you want to be whole then you'd better deal with reality the way it really is. So how do we know how it really is? Well, as we said, nothing is provable, but some things just make more sense. Will you go with them, or hang on to what you wish were true, stubbornly demanding the "proof" that isn't going to come? This is the test of character I was talking about.

Ideas like the notion that the universe appeared on its own cannot really be proved or disproved. But what we know tells us that it is highly unlikely. I'm not sure why some people choose to believe what is unlikely, but guys like Harold, bless his soul, seem to get a kick out of doing that. Harold is sort of like the guy who plays the lottery. He's a sucker for the long shot. I do hope he eventually picks a winner. But it's likely not going to be the thing for which the odds are longest. When betting your soul, it pays to go with the odds-on winner, and not spend your life waiting for "proof." Of course, you also re-examine your beliefs along the way and modify as makes sense.


When the "proof" about God finally comes, it will be too late to make a decision either way. You don't need to "decide" when there is absolutely no longer any doubt. People who want proof of God will get it. But betting on God at that point will be like betting on a football game after it's over. No faith, no risk, no test of character, so no reward.


PS I can't prove any of this, it's just what makes the most sense to me.