God is found

What is god? To most people it is a conscious super being; perfect, omnipotent, immortal, the creator of the universe, always having existed, uncreated. Have I left anything out?

Christians believe god will save us and give us everlasting life once we’re dead, and it judges us, sending some to hell and others to heaven.

The problem is, god doesn’t do press conferences and it doesn’t do public appearances, so no one can prove it exists. It’s a real shame.

The problem is I, an atheist, found a logical proof for god. It’s rather simple so I wonder why no one has come up with it before.

We exist. We did not always exist. We didn’t create ourselves or the universe.

So if we define god as that which produced us or created us, then by necessity there is a god.

The second part to the logic is that if ever absolutely nothing at all existed, then nothing could now exist.

Therefore something has always existed. Existence is the default state.

So now the Christians and Muslims and Jews are happy. Logical proof of god at last.

But wait a minute. While the premise is sound and the conclusion is irrefutable, nothing in the formula tells us anything about this god. It could be anyone’s god. It’s not necessarily a god we think of as a god.

It could even be a process of nature. Pantheists believe the all, together, is god. That’s an option.

But I said that which produced us is god. I think most religious people would agree that this is the minimum every offshoot of Judaism would agree with.

So strangely, science can provide the answer. One substance stands out as the logical contender for the title god. That substance is what all things are made of: energy.

Energy can’t be created or destroyed. The only thing energy does, is transform. It has, in fact, transformed into everything we can think of.

The universe is made of it. The BB is said to have been the universe in a highly dense state. What was this compressed substance? Energy.

Energy meets all the requirements of the first and second part of the argument. Energy is as far as we know: eternal, having always existed in one form or the other. It’s expansion created the universe, stars, planets, biology, and everything else, from itself.

The way energy produces things is in layers. The atomic layer is it’s home. It formed atoms which when bonded in various combinations produce the material we see and experience in this layer. We and all things exist and function by the rules set down by the nature of energy.

In fact, when we say nature, we are saying the nature of energy, because we are all part of the nature of energy.

Cause and effect is the result of that nature.

God is everywhere they say. Well, energy is everywhere and in all things. In fact there is nothing but energy. God is light. Energy is light.

In fact most of the claims about god are true of energy.

Reincarnation of a sort is an ongoing thing through life. As energy that was part of you joins with other systems. This process goes on after death. An individual thing may no longer exist, but all the energy that made up that thing never dies, is never destroyed, it just goes on to form part of other things.

Does it retain any memory of us? We don’t know, though it’s possible.

Still, I can’t promise anyone heaven much less a soul. Nature doesn’t seem to work that way.

But how much more personal can a god be? You’re a literal part of it, made from it; not just in its image.

Is energy perfect? No, but nothing is ultimately perfect. If a god creates, it has a need to create. Anything with needs is not perfect by definition. Creation of any kind comes as a response to the fulfillment of need. A perfect thing has no needs and no need to create anything.

Besides which, imperfection causes conflict, so until everything is perfect, nothing can be truly perfect.

But from the standpoint of human beings who cherish creativity, it’s the perfect creative force.

Is it omnipotent? Well what does that mean? Is it all powerful? In the sense that it is the most powerful force in existence, yes.

Does it provide morality? Sure does. I’ve written a lot about natural morality.

Is it conscious? No. But it doesn’t have to be. Neuroscience shows us that consciousness is a tool that helps educate the subconscious. What in the world would energy need to learn? We are the ones who need to learn cause and effect for our survival. God doesn’t need consciousness. It had its nature. It is its nature.

Is there a purpose for all this? Well there seems to be. Energy keeps refining its creations. They evolve from the simple to the complex. Again, creativity is a response to conflict and conflict demands a resolution. That new resolution is always a new order. It seems as if the universe is trying to work out its problems through creation. Hence, it seems to be looking for perfection. Probably with no chance of reaching it, but who knows?

After all, creation only comes as response to need. And all this from the ramifications of the laws of thermodynamics and conservation.

So for those who need to have a purpose in life, what more noble purpose can there be than working to toward perfection for all, with everything you do, know it or not. Everyone is doing god’s will, so to speak.

And death is just giving up self for a higher cause. Nothing that was you is dead, it’s just not an individual anymore. You are sill part of the all.

So what if it actually reached perfection? It would have created the god-state.

Now all of the above was written in such a way as to be able to relate this story to the religious. But all of it is based on science and the laws of nature to show that there is an alternative to a conscious god.

This is creation from the bottom up; from energy, the smallest of the small creates the most complex. From imperfection to perfection.

Not a universe from the top down where a super being creates from the most complex down to smallest of the small, from “perfection” to imperfection.

Does this god require worship? No. But we can stand in awe of it, as life, existence, is the most astounding thing I know. And the more I learn, the more reverence I have for the universe.

I’ve written more scientific minded hubs/texts on the science involved in all this, so that’s why I didn’t repeat it all here.

I’ve also written a bit in the past about Pantheism which sees the universe itself as qualifying as god. But I was never completely happy about that. I wanted to find the source of the universe itself, and I think I have.

If other Pantheists agree, all the better. But that’s why I no longer call my world view Scientific Pantheism: I’ve renamed my alteration: Rational Pantheism. Not saying other forms are not rational, just doing it to distinguish between opinions.

For traditional theists I wrote this to show that you are no longer the only game in town. There is a simple and rational answer to our existence, and science has probably already found it.

For atheists who don’t want to call anything god and have no need of purpose, I’m with you brothers and sisters. Ignore this, it’s not for you.

More by this Author

  • The Cruelty Of The Christian God
    110

    I have often mentioned the cruelty of the Judaic-Christian God. Let’s examine that claim from the beginning: It is said that when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, God told them that they could have...

  • There Is an Exception to Every Rule
    7

    There is a big problem with some sayings that seem perfectly logical. Let’s look at this common example: There is an exception to every rule. Most people would just start thinking of all the rules they can recall...

  • Venting your plumbing
    21

    This essay is on the importance of venting a drainage system, the consequences of not doing so, and how to fix it.


Comments 26 comments

Spirit Whisperer profile image

Spirit Whisperer 19 months ago from Isle of Man

"Be still and know that I am God!" It is the thinking that prevents the stillness required to realise who we are. Great read though and I have tweeted it and included it in our Hypnotherapy daily Newspaper!


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

Always honored that you read my posts. Hope your family and yourself are well.


Spirit Whisperer profile image

Spirit Whisperer 19 months ago from Isle of Man

I often think of you and I too hope you and your family are well.

I hope you like how you are featured in my Newspaper:

https://paper.li/manxhypnosis/1329232845


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

Again, my thanks. You didn't have to do that, particularly as you somewhat disagree with the premise. ;) You're genuinely a nice guy. Thanks for that as well.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 19 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

In this hub, you said, "Nothing that was you is dead, it’s just not an individual anymore. You are sill part of the all."

And nothing could be more true than that. We are all part of the universe/cosmos/all.

I have a formula for the "all", it's:

infinite matter + infinite energy + infinite space = the infinite universe (the ALL).


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

Well judging by your formula, you're a Pantheist like me. Whether that's ever crossed your mind before or not, I don't know. And if you'd rather not label yourself, that's fine too.

But it's always nice to see there are like minded people. ;)


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 19 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

Yes, the pantheist label fits, but mostly I consider myself to be an atheist, or perhaps an anti-theist. Many people do not know what a pantheist is, but wrongly assume that it means the person believes in "some sort" of god. Whereas, atheist clears it up right away.

What really lights my fire about religionists is that they don't even bother to read their "holy books", they simply spew back whatever it was that they were forced to memorize as children. I also suspect brain defects in those that cannot read something and understand what it actually means. They seem to have some sort of comprehension disability.

I've noticed this over and over in the Q&A section. Some of these people absolutely will not or cannot answer a question with any degree of free thought. They just vomit back the bible or some other copy/paste thing they have come across that almost, but not quite pertains to the subject at hand.

They stubbornly refuse (or are unable) to "think outside the box" as it were.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

Pantheism is atheism. The Catholic church was quick to warn people about that when Scientific Pantheism was organized. I thought it was kind of them to give us such wonderful endorsement.

I'm not an anti theist as such, I'm an anti fundamentalist. The moderate Christian and even the Catholics understand the need for separation of church and state in a multicultural society. They accept evolution and don't want creationism in science class, because they don't take the OT literally. They agree with access to safe abortion, and most accept gay rights.

In fact, if we think about it, they are the people who separated church and state, and allowed/brought in the reforms I mentioned. After all, atheists were a minority of less than 12 percent in the US until recently.

The trouble is, as atheism rises so does fundamentalism. Unfortunately most of the theists on forums debating atheists are fundamentalists, and as you point out, there is no common ground to be found. We can barely communicate with these people. Everything we say was put in our mouths by satan.

How does any rational person respond to that? It would be funny were it not so dangerous for free society.

I do think fundamentalism is fundamentally a disease of the mind which refuses logic at all costs. Remember that for them, one wrong move means the fire. They can't allow anything other than the word of god in.

So they are the ones we are fighting, not the moderates who are still the silent majority.

I'm Canadian so things aren't as bad here with fundamentalism. But I am worried about the US, for everyone's sake.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 19 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

You are so right, Slarty. Atheists are the most untrusted people in the universe apparently.

Be glad you live in Canada. Bob and I would move there in a minute if it weren't so cold. But if Texas continues to be the hotbed of political stupidity, we might move further south after all.

Wait, aren't some parts of Canada relatively warm?

I wish I could be a moderate, but my big mouth has other ideas and often engages itself before I can stop it. At least in Texas, I can keep the shotgun handy in case any would-be fundamentalists want to try to stone me for being a witch or something.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

Hey, I'd think about moving south every winter if it wasn't for the fundamentalists.

Victoria BC, and Vancouver, are pretty moderate, but it never gets really hot either. And I'm not sure you can bring a shotgun.

Where I live we probably rival Texas for heat in the summer. But the winters spoil it all.

Still, we love living here. Just wish global warming would move it's ass. I'm not getting any younger.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 19 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

Man, I was a vampire for 38 years and I'm getting older by the second! (I was an Immunohematologist/Blood Banker)

This getting old thing is for the birds.

I've read a few stories and seen a few TV shows about Vancouver. I don't care for cities anymore and isn't there a volcano or two near there?

And that's funny right there - "I'd think about moving south every winter if it wasn't for the fundamentalists" You got that right!


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

No volcano's that I know of, but I could be wrong. Victoria is a very nice small city with less rain. I liked living there. Couldn't get work though. But that was back in the 1970s.

Yup, getting old sucks. I officially turn old this year. I turn 60 in June.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 19 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

Yep, that's official old coot status. I'll be 63.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 19 months ago from Canada Author

lol...


jgshorebird profile image

jgshorebird 16 months ago from Earth

What is energy and from whence did it spring? We only know, I posit, that existence exists. That energy exists. We do not know how it came be, what it is (yet) or where it is going. It's a great mystery. I love mysteries.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 16 months ago from Canada Author

What is anything, really? We can only describe things by what they do, how they behave, taste smell feel, etc. We then give those descriptions a name.

An apple is a fruit, but we can keep asking, but what is it really, and keep getting different answers. It's a seed pod. a new tree will grow from it. But what is it really? Cells and chemicals. But what are those? Atoms, in the end. And what's an atom? Energy, at its core, and what is energy?

That's where the line stops, but we know how it works. We have the laws of physics.

What is it really? We can't answer directly. We can only tell you how it behaves. No one knows what anything is, really.

Where did it come from? Did it come from anywhere at all or has it always existed in one form or other? That's the question. One of the laws of physics says it can't be destroyed, and it can't be created. So it could have always existed.

Where is it going? Well it can't be created or destroyed, but it can be transformed, and that's what it does. And in doing so it creates all we see.

Einstein says in the theory of relativity that energy creates matter. Matter is compressed energy traveling sub-light speed.

Mass is energy: E=Mc squared. But mass does not automatically mean matter.

Where is it going, really? Well the atom's main goal is to find equilibrium. A perfect balance. That one law, the law of energy conservation, is what creates all this. Atoms have to merge and in doing so they create new substances.

So you could say that creating more and more complex systems it's trying to find an ultimate balance, or perfection, by working out all the problems one by one. But that's just taking the tenancy to the limit. Probably not a hope in hell of ever reaching a state of ultimate perfection, and I doubt that universe is consciously doing it.

But yes, ultimately it's still all a big mystery, and like you, I love it.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 16 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

I wonder, why is there air. Then I realize that the answer is still 42. Thanks for all the bananas.


jgshorebird profile image

jgshorebird 16 months ago from Earth

I agree. Labels or definitions are based upon our perceptions, leading to concepts (concretes), tested by what we know to be real...sure. But labels are not the thing, only our definition of it. The thing is itself. Energy, a thing, is itself. A is A. Atoms are atoms. The Law of Identity. That is all we can know...currently. We cannot know if energy is God. That's a leap of faith and what is God anyway?

By the way...when scientists slowed the speed of light, did that throw a monkey wrench into E=MC2? And why do you think things become more complex? Toward perfection? What is that? Could not energy devolve? Things become more simplified or more chaotic or both?

It just seems that the hub has a bit of 'mysticism'. That's was why I asked those questions. We cannot know 'the' answer. We can posit it, but in 500 years they will think we were all morons I'll wager.

And I'm not just worried about the U.S., but planet earth, when it comes to the Witch Doctors.


Austinstar profile image

Austinstar 16 months ago from Somewhere in the universe

Infinity is the answer. Infinite matter + infinite space + infinite energy = the infinite universe. It's as simple as that.


jgshorebird profile image

jgshorebird 16 months ago from Earth

Really hard to verify. Always wondered about the nature of something that is not finite. Sort of like trying to fathom the nature of nature or a rock's rockness. My finite brain wants to compare infinity to something else. I have reached an epistemological dead end.


Say Yes To Life profile image

Say Yes To Life 16 months ago from Big Island of Hawaii

This is the best explanation I've ever read. Voted up!


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 16 months ago from Canada Author

"And why do you think things become more complex? Toward perfection? What is that? Could not energy devolve? Things become more simplified or more chaotic or both?"

Well, perfection for an atom is equilibrium. The problem is there are so many different kinds which all have their own equilibrium. They interact, of course, causing the combined lowest possible out put of energy to change for the combination.

Perfection is subjective for the most part. I've done hubs on the topic. But we can imagine an ultimate perfection would have to be perfect for everything, otherwise issues would still arise that could destroy the perfection. So it's safe to say there is currently no such thing.

In evolution there is no such thing as devolution because every change, even damaging change to the point of extinction is still evolution. And in biology that's certainly possible for any species. But energy doesn't evolve, it transforms, and it can't go extinct.

The laws of physics create this dynamic that keeps creating the complex from the simple.

Like I said before, the laws of conservation force atoms to merge with each other, the combination of which creates a new substance on this level of existence. The most basic atom is hydrogen. One electron and one proton. Add an electron and a proton and you have something entirely different. Add more, with neutrons as a buffer and you you eventually have all the elements that exist.

Combine elemental compounds and you get complex compounds.

Hydrogen burns really well. But to do so it needs oxygen. The byproduct of combustion is pure water.

All of this from one simple rule: All atoms always tend toward their lowest possible energy out put.

Chaos theory tells us more. Simple rules repeated create the complex from the simple. A tree looks very complex. But it grows by a simple rule: Grow a little and divide. How it looks in the end is due to this simple rule played against water fall, soil conditions, air quality, sun light, etc, in the exact location the tree occupies.

So the simple to the complex is inevitable in this universe.

Now I did explain in the hub that the reason I say energy=god is just to show that energy is the alternative non religious explanation for origin.

I'm an atheist and I'm not suggesting anything mystical except in metaphorical terms. Energy qualifies as being the same thing as a god, if you define god as that which created all this, but by way of process as opposed to conscious will and magic words.


jgshorebird profile image

jgshorebird 16 months ago from Earth

Energy and/or God were always there? Given that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed we (everything) are the result of a Great Turing Machine that just keeps churning away? Interesting. So long as the energy is sticky too.

When and if it is ever confirmed that the Law of Conservation is flawed, this line of reasoning collapses. And never say never...

Or if entropy, the heat death theory of the universe is valid, the expanding universe would eventually tend toward simpler dust. No more atom sex. That would probably suck.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 16 months ago from Canada Author

In theology god always existed. It's better than having to answer the question: who created god.

And logically if there had ever been a state where nothing at all existed nothing would exist now. You can't get something from absolutely nothing.

So traditionally that something has been consciousness in the form of spirit, gods, usually with one head god that is rather aloof and doesn't care about us, with sons and daughters who do, as long as they have use for us, and most recently imminent gods that are part of everything like Mazda, and of course the Christian/Jewish/Islamic god.

So finding in science an alternative is very interesting. Some thing that potentially always was. In Big Bang theory energy exists in a highly compressed state. It seems to have started expanding 13 billion years ago and due to it's nature started creating all this. Energy wasn't created in the BB. This is the singularity in expanded form.

Now what about heat death? Well yes, that could happen but not through entropy. As long as atoms can interact there will always be some thing going on. Entropy tells us that some energy in every system reaches equilibrium. Open systems like the earth, humans, etc, bring in energy that's left or reached equilibrium. The only time to worry about entropy is in a closed system where no energy can be added.

Heat death, of course, would happen if all atoms were so far apart that there would be nothing to interact with. That might be the case if expansion continues for another billion billion years. Maybe. But there would probably always be pockets of activity.

Even with dark energy pulling everything apart, if that's true, galaxies will move away from each other and we will be alone in about 4 billion years or so, but our galaxy itself is not drifting apart due to gravity. It’ll still be around in a hundred billion years, and indefinitely. Lots going on. Stars and planets being born all the time. And we are going to merge with Alfa Century. Don’t worry though, lots of space. Few collisions are expected.

Notice that entropy is actually part of conservation. It’s also part of the process of creation. The energy that has gone into equilibrium is in it’s perfect state so to speak. Heat death would be a form of perfection for atoms.

But that energy isn’t dead. It gets used by other systems or becomes reactivated when new energy is added to the system. Were that not possible like in a closed system or heat death, that energy would be potential until something started gathering energy together again.

However, heat death is just one hypothesis of many. Who knows what’s going to happen in trillions of years from now. We had better have moved before our sun goes red giant in 5 billion years or so, if we survive that long.

Cosmology as opposed to the laws of thermodynamics is still a guessing game. But conservation of energy is not likely to be proven wrong. We’ve tried, but it reflects reality too well to consider it anything but fact. We use it every day in any number of technologies.

But yes, even facts can be modified with new information. And yes, my hypothesis is based on science but shouldn’t be mistaken for science or fact. It’s a model based on facts. And yes models change with new insights. But I think it has a reasonable chance of being correct, even if incomplete.


Slarty O'Brian profile image

Slarty O'Brian 16 months ago from Canada Author

Sorry. That should read: Alpha Centauri.


jgshorebird profile image

jgshorebird 16 months ago from Earth

Interesting viewpoint. I think some of your points will stick in my brain for a while. Not that I want them there. "Out, damned spot! Out, I say!..."

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working