Monday, September 30, 2002

(Everyone should own a copy of this book, by the way. Please not that many of these arguments will not point to a “personal God” who gives a fig for us. That will have to come later, so don’t bother jumping on that complaint-wagon just yet, since I’m not trying to prove it—so far.)

The Argument from Change, from Kreeft and Tacelli, as interpreted by the Kairos Guy

Something that has not yet come to be, does not exist. My $150 million winning PowerBall ticket hasn’t happened yet, so I would be wise not to start spending the money or endowing a charity with it just yet. And because it doesn’t exist, it cannot cause anything. If I start spending the money, that will not bring the ticket into existence. So the purported “cause” of my spending (the ticket) is false, and it is only my delusion that has brought my spending about.

Everything in the universe exists and constantly changes. The state of being of myself as I write this is different as each letter goes down on the electronic page. The state of satisfaction that I expect to achieve when I am done cannot cause me to start (only the desire for that state). As I mentally progress backwards through my own life, and further in time, I cannot find a state of being that could have brought itself about. Someone or something ultimately must have set the thing in motion, for the physical laws of the universe are clear: there cannot be an uncaused cause within the universe.

So, therefore, the existence of a universe of constant change, rather than a flat, static system, is evidence that someone outside the system set the system in motion. Therefore, there must be a God.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home