I - Considerations on the Person of God

​

No one can consider the person of God without first referring to the question of the very existence of God. The question of the existence of God is the most practical of the most fundamental questions[1]. It has caused a lot of ink to flow and has given rise to many theories about it, whether in the scientific, philosophical, theological and other fields. In this sense, we are going to see what some great scientists and philosophers think, and moreover, the point of view developed in the Bible on this subject. In this way, to make it easier for readers to understand, as Nicolas Boileau  said: "  What we conceive well is clearly stated ... », we would like to divide this work into several independent articles as to the consistency of each content, but still keeping a logical sequence as to the ideas that will be developed. The very first of this series takes into account the approach of scientists with regard to the considerations made on the person of God.

 

         I.1 Origin of the Universe

​

In this section, we are not going to dwell on the various scientific theories that want God to be the object of their experimental study to green light his existence, because God is not a thing and cannot -be even less an object of study in the laboratory since one can experience one's person in everyday life. However, we will be interested in recent scientific discoveries admitting that the Universe had a beginning. And, any sane person would agree that everything that comes into existence should be created by another entity. So, if everything has a beginning, then it would be correct to think or suppose that there is a higher mind behind all this well-ordered machinery that is the Universe, as to the physical and other laws which govern it with particular precision. mind-blowing. Our concern in this paper is to show that these incredible discoveries, scientifically proven or not, point to an undeniable, absolute and creative being who can only be God.

​

          _cc781905-5cde-3194 -bb3b-136bad5cf58d_       _cc781905-94cf6-bad35-94cde-3194-badI.1.1 What about a “ Scientifique ”?

​

A scientist, formerly called " savant ", is a man or woman of science. He is a researcher who carries out research work that meets the requirements of objectivity, method[i], precision of science with rigor, and above all who regularly publishes concrete, verifiable and refutable results[2].

​

​

​

​

​

​

​​

​

This diagram illustrates well the process of production of scientific knowledge, even if it varies between scientific disciplines, but they all follow the same principle : observe – predict – test – generalize[3].  

​

          _cc781905-5cde-3194 -bb3b-136bad5cf58d_       _cc781905-94cf6-bad35-94cde-3194-badI.1.2 Some considerations of scientists on the origin of the Universe and the person of God

​

According to Georges Smoot, astrophysicist and cosmologist[ii], winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2006, stated that we are not the result of a simple cosmic accident, nor the fortuitous result of a chain of physical processes in a Universe. which crushes us completely[1]. In this case, if it is not a simple cosmic accident, where did the Universe come from? Where do we come from?

 

Already, in 1878, the physicist Ludwig Boltzmann, considered the father of static physics, in his search for a secret code that could explain the origin of the Universe, had discovered a mathematical formula to tell us about entropy[ iii]. Among others, for Boltzmann, as for Galileo, not the slightest doubt : the reality in which we live is essentially mathematical[2]. Through his equation, he argued that everything in nature is mysteriously encrypted, calculated, ordered, even coded. And, applying his formula to the entire Universe, two things emerged. One of them was to affirm that the Universe is not eternal, but that it had a beginning.

 

It must therefore be conceded that in the past such questions were rather the prerogative of philosophers and theologians. As for the scientists, they took the universe for granted and many of them assumed it to be eternal as it was in Boltzmann's time. Moreover, under the fire of criticism from his contemporaries who thought that the Universe was eternal, he went through bouts of depression which led to his suicide in 1906. A few years later, after his death, his ideas went triumph. But everything began to change in the 1920s, with a surprising discovery by the Belgian astrophysicist, Georges Lemaître[4] where he concluded, working on the " equations of the field_cc781905-5cde-3194- bb3b-136bad5cf58d_” by Einstein – mathematical formulas that allowed him to establish his theory of general relativity and win the Nobel Prize, that the universe had not always been stable and static. Consequently, from his calculations, the Belgian astronomer succeeded in demonstrating that the Universe had a beginning[5]. Additionally, physicists Audrey Mithani and Alexander Vilenkin, in their research " Did the Universe have a beginning?[iv] ", after evaluating three supposed scenarios explain how the Universe could not have a beginning, concluded the following :

 

"Obviously we can say that the universe had a beginning[6]. "

 

Moreover, no scientist is unaware that the Universe is governed by physical laws. In this sense, all scientists, without exception, admit that there are four fundamental forces that direct the Universe : the gravitational force, the electromagnetic force, the strong and weak nuclear forces. Everything around us could not exist without these four forces[7]. The latter dictate all the laws of physics and govern the entire Universe[8]. And from these forces arise figures whose apparent adjustment seems almost supernatural, because these constants take on such precise values. Conversely, the Universe itself, and nothing that exists would have the slightest chance of existing. For his part, Stephen Hawking, theoretical physicist and cosmologist, in his book A Brief History of Time, wrote:

 

“  The laws of science, as we currently know them, contain certain fundamental numbers, such as the electric charge of the electron or the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron… This what is remarkable is that the value of these figures seems to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life[3]. »

 

By these words, the famous English scientist means that, if everything is so well balanced mathematically to an infinitesimal degree that life is possible, nothing has been done by chance. And, he continued in the same vein to assert that he calculated that if the speed of expansion of the Universe one second after the Big Bang had been shorter by one hundred thousand million million, the Universe turned  into a ball of fire[4]. This precision, at the level of the Universe, is so extraordinarily fantastic in its mathematical aspect that it would be completely absurd to think that it comes from an accident or pure chance. In addition, long before this remark by Stephen, Einstein who was very present on this ground had to say :

 

"  The idea that the order and precision of the universe, in its innumerable aspects, would be the result of blind chance is as little credible as if, after the explosion of a printing press, all the characters fell to the ground in dictionary order.

 

Again, this is a clear way for the latter to uproot any assumption that chance might be calculating the order in the Universe and to assume that there must be some intelligent cause behind it all. This is how Einstein, without too many detours, wrote one day in 1936 to affirm that, behind this immense machinery that is the Universe, there exists a spirit immensely superior to that of man. [6].

 

So what once shocked scientists is now well accepted that our Universe didn't always exist; it was created at some point, as absolutely all things have been. However, all scientists are unanimous in recognizing that everything that has a beginning has a cause. In this sense, therefore, the Universe must have a very powerful cause capable of creating it. Thus, the order which reigns in the Universe is a mathematically describable order and precisely adjusted in order to allow life. The fact is that life is a very fragile thing that requires very strict conditions to be able to develop. It would have been enough for the fundamental laws and constants of physics to be slightly different for life to be impossible. In other words, among a multitude of possible universes, a tiny number of them is favorable to life. To the extent that such a result is more difficult to achieve by chance than by the fruit of an intelligence, it seems much more probable that the universe is the result of an extraordinarily intelligent cause[10].

 

The physical theorist, Alexander Polyakov, in turn, came to state loud and clear that : “ We know that nature is described by the best of all mathematics possible, because God created it. And, this point of view is expressed by several other great scientists such as : Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, who assert that the world (creation, the universe) is the expression of thought of God.

​

“  I want to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, this or that element I want to know the thought of God ; the rest is just details[11]. ” (Einstein)

 

Stephen Hawking's very last word, when he questioned why the Universe exists to close his Brief History of Time, was no different from Einstein's answer.

 

“ If we find the answer to this question, it will be the ultimate triumph of human reason – at that time we will know the mind of God[12]._cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b- 136bad5cf58d_” (Hawking)

 

It should be noted that there is a half-century of distance separating these two scientists, but that did not prevent them from coming up with almost the same answers when faced with the same border question between God and science. For some, this could become the horizon of scientific research in the 21st century, as the great theorist Freeman Dyson, one of the colleagues of James Peebles, Crafoord Prize in Astronomy 2005, asserts, saying that “_cc781905-5cde -3194-bb3b-136bad5cf58d_the challenge is to read the thought of God[8] ”, in order to know why the Universe exists and how the world was created.

 

Many scientists who are not atheists accept and defend the existence and presence of a creator endowed with infinite powers. For example, astrophysicist Hugh Ross defends the existence of a creator of the universe who is above all physical dimensions[13]:

 

By definition, time is the dimension in which the cause-effect phenomenon occurs. If there is no time, there is no cause or effect. If time begins with the creation of the universe, as stated in the "time-space theorem", then the cause of the creation of the universe must be some entity operating in a time dimension completely independent and pre-existing of the time dimension of the cosmos... This would mean that the Creator is transcendent, and that He would operate beyond the dimensional limits of the universe. This suggests that God is neither the universe in itself nor contained in the universe[14].

 

Moreover, there is even a scientific movement made up of people like the mathematician William Demski and the biochemist Michael Behe inferring that there must be an intelligent designer of the universe and the biological world. Because, from a rational and scientific point of view, all the evidence leads us to believe that there must be an intelligent Creator [9]. Moreover, it turns out that this was the view of many other scientists, self-styled creationists, whose names are virtually synonymous with the advancement of modern science. For them, the scientific enterprise was the highest vocation : it is to be dedicated to the thoughts of God[10]. This is the case with Isaac Newton, the founder of classical physics, when he said cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b-136bad5cf58d_:

​

“ This marvelous system which is the universe with the sun, the planets and the comets can only come from the will and the power of an intelligent being… This being governs all things and not only the world.[15]”

 

Louis Pasteur, the founder of microbiology, for his part made this statement :

​

“  The more I study nature, the more I marvel at the works of our Creator. Science brings me closer to God.[16] »

 

He is also very famous for saying that a little science leads away from God, but a lot leads back to it, meaning that God is at the very heart of science.  Nicolas Copernicus, the founder of heliocentric cosmology, for his part, said :

 

“  Knowing about the mighty works of God, trying to understand his wisdom, majesty and power and appreciating in some way the workings of his laws, is certainly a way of worshiping God, for whom ignorance cannot be more grateful than knowledge.[17] »

 

So, throughout the history of mankind, we have noticed that science has evolved a lot. However, she cannot set herself up as a master, with regard to the great questions which since time immemorial have caused a lot of ink to flow by giving a hard time, as to her conclusions on the question of the existence of God. . It can only reveal it by taking into account the facts and recent scientific discoveries.

 

Conclusion

​

Indeed, if scientists all agree that everything that comes into existence has a cause that is not chance, as we had elaborated in the previous lines and that the Universe began to exist , then the Universe therefore has a cause… and the supernatural cause must be a being that has no cause, invariable, immaterial and outside of time. Moreover, it is what an author could argue when he affirms that the Universe was not born in time but with time[11]. Subsequently, Einstein will support exactly the same thing by stipulating that if there is an era before the creation of space, time and matter, an era before the big bang, this is no longer a matter of science but rather of the metaphysical quest.

 

All this only attests to the evidence that everything points to a creator – the Creator. Because the principle is that everything that begins to exist must have a cause. Being cannot come from non-being[12]. So could we ask who is at the origin of God? And, since God never began to exist, he needs no cause. It simply never came into existence. God is Eternal. This is why many of them were always in search and do not cease seeking to know the thoughts of this creator God who has always been at the origin of all things.

​

​​

Rosemond SAINT-PAULIN
General Secretary of Standing 4 Christ Ministry

rosardise2003@yahoo.fr 

​

​

References

 

[1]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  KD Georges Smoot, The wrinkles of time: The universe, three hundred thousand years after the Big Bang. Paris: coll. “New scientific library”, 1994.

 

[2]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  I. and G. BOGDANOV, The Secret Code of the Universe. Albin Michel, 2015.

 

[3]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  S. Hawking, “A brief History of Time,” Flammarion., Bantam Books, 1988, p. 1989.

 

[4]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  L. STROBEL, Plea for Faith -, Vida. France: Graphic Presence-Monts, 2002.

 

[5]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  I. and G. BOGDANOV, La fin du chance. Grasset & Fasquelle, 2013.

 

[6]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  I. and G. BOGDANOV, The face of God. Grasset & Fasquelle, 2010.

 

[7]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  I. and G. BOGDANOV, The face of God-. Grasset & Fasquelle, 2010.

 

[8]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  F. Dyson, Infinite in All Directions. New York: Harper & Row, 1988.

 

[9]     _cc781905-5cde-3194-bb3b -136bad5cf58d_  L. STROBEL, Plea for Faith, Vida. France: Graphic Presence-Monts, 2002.

 

[10]      C. Ray, Faits scientifiques in the Bible: 100 Reasons to Believe in the Supernatural Origin of the Bible. 2001.

 

[11]      I. et G. BOGDANOV , The face of God. Grasset & Fasquelle, 2010.

 

[12]      L. STROBEL, Plaidoyer pour faith., Vida. France: Graphic Presence-Monts, 2002.

​

[1] https://comprendredieu.com/dieu-existe-t-il/dieu-existe-t-il-version-texte/  (accessed on 08/01/2019)

​

[2] https://jpcmanson.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/what-is-scientific/

​

[3] https://explorable.com/fr/quest-ce-que-la-methode-scientifique

​

[4] https://www.mondedemain.org/revues/2012/october-decembre/d-ou-vient-l-univers (consulted on 01/11/2019)

​

[5] http://www.alterinfo.net/La-creation-de-l-univers-a-partir-du-neant_a10926.html (accessed on 01/23/2019)

​

[6] https://www.mondedemain.org/revues/2012/october-december/d-ou-vient-l-univers

​

[7] http://viontechnologie.e-monsite.com/pages/l-univers/la-theorie-du-tout.html

​

[8] http://www.univers-astronomie.fr/articles/univers/57-les-forces-fondamentales.html

​

[9] https://www.mondedemain.org/revues/2012/october-decembre/d-ou-vient-l-univers  (consulted on 11 /01/2019)

​

[10] https://comprendredieu.com/dieu-existe-t-il/dieu-existe-t-il-version-texte/  (accessed on 08/01/2019)

​

[11] Interview by E. Salaman, “ A Talk With Einstein ”, The Listener 54 (1955)

​

[12] Stephen Hawking, op. cit.

​

[13] http://www.alterinfo.net/La-creation-de-l-univers-a-partir-du-neant_a10926.html#8 (accessed on 08/01/2019)

​

[14] http://www.alterinfo.net/La-creation-de-l-univers-a-partir-du-neant_a10926.html#8   (accessed on 09/01/2019)

​

[15] Isaac Newton, Principia, book N°3, quoted in " A selection of Newton's writings " by HS Thayer, p.42

​

[16] From John Hudson Tiner's book " Louis Pasteur, founder of modern medicine ", 1990

​

[17] Quoted in “ The Knights Among the Nations ”, 1907, by Louis E. Van Norman, p. 290

 

 

[i] The scientific method designates the set of canons guiding or intended to guide the process of producing scientific knowledge, whether it be observations, experiments, reasoning, or theoretical calculations.

​

[ii] A cosmologist is a researcher whose research concerns the genesis, history, structure, contents and evolution of the universe. This is usually an astrophysicist or a physicist who has specialized in cosmology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmologist

 

[iii] For more information on the concept, you can visit the following link : https://www.futura-sciences.com/sciences/definitions/physics-entropy-3895/

​

[iii] The authors discuss three candidate scenarios that seem to allow for the possibility that the universe existed forever without an initial singularity: eternal inflation, cyclical evolution, and emergent universe. The first two of these scenarios are geodetically incomplete with respect to the past and therefore cannot describe a beginningless universe. The third, although stable with respect to classical disturbances, can mechanically collapse in a quantum way and therefore cannot have an eternal past. https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.4658