In this article I will talk about the differences between the Creator and Law. Many people think that they do not need an explanation of the origins of the universe that includes God because science can explain it. I will try to explain why that statement makes logically no sense.
God or Science?
We often hear, including from scientists, that we either have to believe in science or a creator. Or they say that one has to choose one between these two. As if there´s no middle ground in that matter. These people make a very critical mistake in categorizing these two arguments. The universe being created by God is an entirely different kind of explanation than explaining it with the law of nature. God is an explanation of the universe but not the same kind of explanation as the scientists provide us with.
The Jet Engine
To better understand this matter let´s look at an example:
We can explain a jet engine in two ways. Firstly by the laws of aerodynamics or engineering. This would be a completely valid and scientific explanation of a jet engine. But that does not negate the fact that it was invented by Sir Frank Whittle, who was an english pilot. We see in this example that the law does not reject the creator.
We must understand that the laws of physics can explain how our universe/ world works but it can not explain how it has started to exist.
Newtons Law and The Big Bang Theory
Let´s look at newtons law of motion. It can perfectly predict how a stone will move with given parameters like velocity, height, and so on. But it cannot cause a stone to move in the first place. It requires a person to throw a stone.
If we look at the big bang theory, we can see how it explains the start of our universe step by step. We can all agree that this theory explains the start of our universe but we have to realize that it did not cause it. How would it be? A theory or scientific papers simply explain things or processes, they do not cause it.
Looking from this perspective, it becomes clear how nonsensical this thought process is, yet there are people who are convinced that there cannot be a creator since science explains it.
Law and Lawgiver
We know that there is law in this universe. Nothing simply exists without a specific law that determines its way of existence. All of science is built upon trying to understand these laws. We can derive from the existence of a law that there must be also a lawgiver. This lawgiver has put this universe in a very specific way. So specific that if you would have changed it very slightly it would stop existing. Therefore the scientists agree that the laws of nature are very finely tuned. This fact negates the possibility of this universe simply existing by chance. The fine-tuning of our universe is a very strong argument for an intelligent creator that it requires its own article. Read it here.
As we learned that law alone cannot cause something to exist or to happen. It requires a creator, causer, lawgiver, or as I like to call it a God. Do you think that it is rational to believe in a self-existing universe without an intelligent being that has caused us and our universe to exist? If so, how would you explain the start of all of this without a creator at the beginning? If you are struggling to answer this question you might find this article about the contingency argument interesting.
