Overview: Different approaches to philosophically concluding the existence of God, the implications of these approaches and the characteristics of this God. Monotheism and monolatry.
The most wanted man ever in history is no man. He engulfs the imagination of children gazing into the skies until they call out to this God on their death-bed. He is regarded by many as the author of the world’s greatest best-seller, the Bible. Is this God the creator of Heavens of Earth or the creation of mankind in quest for meaning in life? Ink was spilled on thousands of pages in attempt to discover this God. Here we will summarize the main points of discussion and the takeaways from it.
Gods of the ignorance of ancients
At the dawn of civilization until the discovery of science and medicine, the gods were viewed as the source for invisible illnesses, the causes of hurricanes, and the rain and drought that dictated the livelihood of the farmers. There was no understanding of the nature system, so people resorted to the god of fertility, the god of rain, and the god of eternity. These pagans looked to the gods, often resembled in images of wood and stone, to find meaning in life, and served them in order to please them for their blessings. With the understanding and advancement of science nowadays, we now view this as non-sense. We understand the tiny bacteria that causes diseases, we understand the weather cycle that causes rain, draught, and hurricanes. The pagan gods have now been replaced by science.
God of nature’s beauty
But much before the scientific advancements a revolutionary idea was brewing in ancient Israel. The God of Abraham, the God of the Jews, the God of Heavens and Earth was the single unified Creator of the universe. The Torah denounced worshipping pagan gods of wood and stone and instead it revolutionized the worship of the single God, Creator of heaven and Earth. Prior the Torah, there was a primary god in many religions (including EL in Canaan), but for the first time in history the worship of pagan gods was actually denounced.
The Torah doesn’t get into philosophical discussions about the nature of this Supreme God, but it does discuss various attributes to Him such as creator of Heaven and Earth (Gen. 1:1), the single God of the world (Deut. 4:35), the universal Judge (Gen. 18:25), and the God who took the Israelites out of Egypt (Ex. 20:2).
Early philosophers began to discuss the philosophical necessity for there to be a God, a Creator of Heaven and Earth. The most basic argument being presented was the sophistication of the universe and the beauty in nature. Surely, the argument goes, this beautiful world must have had a Creator. A classic parable for this would be a sophisticated painting, which one would surely conclude that it was painted by an artist and didn’t come-about by an accidental spillage of paint jars. The rationale is that the odds of chances don’t allow for sophistication and precision in the art. Similarly, the world, also incredibly sophisticated, is bound to have an artist—Creator of heaven and earth.
This argument was substantial up until modern times when the Evolution theory (perhaps including the multi-verse theory) can now substitute this conclusion for a God. 14 billion years and Evolution help us understand how the world got to the beauty that it now has. The Theory of Evolution has replaced this ancient argument for God.
God of the train carts
A more modern approach to the question of God’s existence is expressed in a parable of train carts. This argument for God’s existence goes like this. When a train cart is rolling down the train-tracks, surely, we can conclude, the cart is being pushed by the preceding cart that it’s connected to. What about the cart before it? That is being pushed by the one before it and the one before it by the before it, etc. The believer finds issue with the atheist approach which falls short of explaining where the first atom came from. The Big Bang theory may help explain the world we have, but that doesn’t answer where the first atom came from. It’s like explaining that the 30th train cart comes from the 29th but avoiding the fact that all these carts are being driven and pulled by the first cart at the very front. To the believer, this first train cart is God Himself.
But the atheist has a good objection to this. Why stop at God? What created God? If everything needs a creator why is God an exception to that rule? If we need to stop at one point and identify the first train cart, we can choose the original atom just like we can choose God.
But there’s actually good reason to assume that the first atom wasn’t there eternally. The original atom was physical, was natural, and thus – based on our logic – must have had a predecessor, a cause. Its predecessor, its cause, cannot be physical and natural since if it were, then it itself is subject to the same cause and effect. We would have an issue of infinite regression in which we can never find a first cause that starts the domino effect of “cause and effect.” Logically, there must be a first cause that is free of the limitations of physicality and nature and therefore needs no cause that came before it. This metaphysical supernatural Being is the Cause for the first atom that rippled into the universe we have today. This is the classical argument for God’s existence and is called the Cosmological Argument.
The nature of this original Cause, or Supernatural Being isn’t exactly known and cannot be known, since our minds are limited to comprehending nature alone. All we can do is conclude that there must be a Cause for nature since all nature is limited to cause and effect. But beyond that, we cannot know. We cannot know or comprehend the character of this Creator of nature All we can conclude is that this Being is the first cause and is thus infinite in terms of time. He’s always been. The second thing we can conclude about this being is that it is a He and not an It. It likely has a consciousness. It at least has the ability to have a consciousness. For hadn’t it had a consciousness, how can it create, or cause, a world in which consciousness does exist. It seems impossible for something to create something else unless it itself has the potential for that creation. You can’t create what you ain’t got. Even when a human creates machinery, he or she is using preexisting elements and powers to harness the power of nature (e.g. radio waves). Humans cannot create an idea that has never existed before. We have no reason to assume that this original metaphysical Being can create something that itself is missing. It can’t create consciousness unless it itself has the ability to be conscious.[1]
God of nature’s rules
Similar to the previous Cosmological Argument, or God of the train carts, this argument will demonstrate a major, existential flaw in nature that will determine an Outsider that is beyond nature. Even Evolution and the Big-Bang Theory must contain an original substance of mass (a singular particle or atom containing all elements) to which the Big Bang happened and the world came about. This original substance is called an atom.
This atom contained a specific number of elements (likely 118) and had a specific shape, color, size, and mass-type. Accordingly, who or what decided that there be only one atom and that this atom have the specific dimensions that it had. Why not it be bigger or smaller, contain more or less elements, be a different shape etc. These are all possibilities – so what decided that it be the specific way it is? What decided that this atom should explode and expand? What decided that gravity pull the energy of this atom to expand, instead of it contracting? Many more such questions can be asked about the specific dimensions of this atom and the rules of nature that caused this atom to explode and expand to eventually create a universe.
“Nature” cannot randomly “decide” for the atom to exist and for it to be in a specific manner, for the whole idea of nature is that it follows a specific set of laws that are predetermined.[2] Thus, who designed those very laws of nature? For example, who decided that large masses should attract smaller mases and cause a gravitational pull and not vise-versa?
In simpler terms, every limitation (which by definition means that it has alternatives) requires a Limiter. Every creation (something that is a limited being) needs a Creator.[3]
This is an existential flaw that nature contains. It’s not a deficiency in our knowledge so that one day we can find the answer – rather, it is a philosophical issue with the very idea of nature. Nature dictates that everything have a cause and that every limitation (e.g. a specific shape over another) need a Limiter (i.e. Someone to decide that it be that color and not the other). Let’s call this Being God.
What is the character of this “Creator”?
We established earlier that it is a Being that was around for eternity and is thus infinite in terms of time. We have also established that He has the ability to be a conscious Being. It would obviously have to be a self-sufficient and self-existing being that’s not dependent on anything else. Meaning, it always existed and nothing can stop it from existing. Additionally, it must be unlimited in all aspects, for if not, we return to square A—what “decided” for it to have these specific limitations? If one is scared of the word “God,” then they can call it whatever they want, but it’s an unlimited existence that creating all finite things.
This God may or may not be subject to the concept of “time” (depending on the answer to whether or not time is a hypothetical necessity).[4] He is also subject to logic. Since 1+1 cannot possibly equal 3, He as well cannot do what is logically impossible. [If we are to abandon logic and allow for God to make 1+1 to equal 3, then in effect we have lost every reason to believe in the existence of God in the first place. We only believe in God out of the logical necessity for Him to exist. But if we are to say that logic doesn’t exist by Him, then we are abandoning the authority we gave logic in the first place. See here for a discussion of the objectivity of logic.]
He also has anthropomorphic qualities. Not that He is essentially bound by these qualities as humans are, but that He has the ability to generate human-like actions. With His omnipotence He can limit Himself locally to “speak” and to “create.” Part of the ability of God is to leave His infinite state of being and manifest Himself into limited attributes. Of course this is all the while He remains much higher than those limited attributes. Perhaps an analogy is from a parent who will lower themselves from their true state of being to show interest in the arts-and-crafts of the child.
Of course this God has a consciousness, since a lack of consciousness is the ultimate limitation (and since He created consciousness, obviously He has it as well – as discussed earlier). He also has the ability to “want” anything since He is unlimited and omnipotent. But how can He want something, which would imply a deficiency, if He already is complete? So the definition of complete is hard to comprehend but it certainly cannot mean that He has two opposite things simultaneously. That would a logical fallacy and an impossible reality. So let us say that He is in an infinite state of being but He then[5] wants to be in a limited attribute as well. There should be no reason that He is unable to manifest Himself into a limited attribute. Thus, whatever He desires, by default becomes the reality. The “deficiency” so to speak, isn’t in Him but in the logical impossibility for Him to be both totally unlimited and partially limited at the same time. It’s either or. So by His decision, He decided to be both infinite and limited locally at the same time. Prior[6] this desire of His, He was totally in an infinite state of being without any local limited attribute.
God of the Covenant
There is yet another indicator of a God, or a supernatural Being. The prophecy fulfilment and astonishing Jewish history is indicative of a single entity that has control of this world. This Being can predict the future, intervene in nature’s course, likely created nature, and isn’t limited to the conventions of nature. From this argument alone, the exact characteristics of this Being wouldn’t be clear – e.g., if He is infinite, and technically wouldn’t be relevant either. The Torah didn’t find it important to discuss the exact characteristics of this One God, so why should we be too concerned with it. Some things are just out of our comprehensive reach.
For a discussion about the biblical conception of God and whether it’s categorized as monotheism or as monolatry, see here.
___________________
[1] Put another way, if it has the ability to create consciousness, surely it has the ability to have (or create) consciousness for itself.
[2] Even when it does seem that nature does “choose,” e.g. in a raffle—it is only externally (i.e. to the drawer and the crowd) a “random choice,” but in essence it was predetermined and bound to happen, as is known to those familiar of this subject. This predetermined result is the result of another predetermination which is the result of another etc. In our case it would be the result of sophisticated brain-nerves and hormones that moved the hand to a specific area to choose that particular winning ticket. Consequently, at one point we are going to have to conclude that there’s a precedent being who surpasses the nature of predetermination and His existence is self-sustained. This First Existence is called God…
[3] This concept parallels the more common logic given for God, just adding a twist to solidify it. Here’s the more classical answer in short: The nature of this world is cause and effect (i.e. every movement of any object or energy is the direct result of another force which dictated that it move in that specific manner). Yet an obvious paradox is that this would be an endless chain with no beginning to have kicked off the first “reaction” or “effect.” This concludes (inconclusively) that there’s a First Existence who cannot be limited to the laws of cause and effect. This First Existence is certainly not within the boundaries of nature (i.e. cause and effect), since if we don’t say so, then we are back to the original question about the original cause and effect. Yet this classical argument fails to determine that He is unlimited in all aspects. It may just be that He is merely above the laws of cause and effect. This is why we prefer to use the logic brought in this chapter to prove the existence of God as it takes the conclusion a step further in describing the characteristic of this God—unlimited in all aspects.
[4] However, unlike humans, He would be able to know the future even though it hasn’t happened yet. This is at least logically possible versus saying that the concept of time does not exist by Him which may not be logically possible to say. But this is a very long philosophical discussion that we will be avoiding.
[5] “Then” is either in time or in concept.
[6] “Prior” either in time or in concept.
