Can Something come From Nothing?

It’s a self defeating argument? Why?.. surely something might be able to come from nothing, it’s just a matter of time before the scientists find out right? Err no. If something can come from ‘nothing’ – then that so-called ‘nothing’ must in fact (according to logic alone) be something! So if a scientist ever tells you that they have proved something came from nothing, they are lying and do not know this for a fact.

Apart from pure logic, the ‘nothing’ they are talking about has to be something according to their own definitions of what is and isn’t possible. After all in one breath they will tell us that information can come from nowhere – likewise matter is the same. Its the same as the wall they hit with quantum physics – they quickly escape to live another day by concocting multi-universe theory. And what’s amusing is that this theory and ones like it, like evolution, are the only possible options if you are going to believe in nature creating itself and far from ingenious thinking.

So Why Do Scientists want to Prove That Something Can Come from Nothing?

Of course, theistic scientists that believe in God love science for a different reason and see it as a means to glorify their creator. But the reason atheistic scientists (and atheists in general) are bent on finding ways to disprove God’s existence is very obvious. The reason they have always looked for ways to prove their naturalist way of thinking is that they do not want to be morally accountable for their actions by some kind of cosmic creator – so if they can disprove the idea that everything must have a creator – even nothing – then they can use this at their defence when they get to the cosmic judgement if for some reason they got it wrong and God does in fact exist and created everything. Science to people that dislike the idea of God is like a cosmic insurance policy.

You see one thing scientists know in the pit of their stomach is that they will never be able to prove that God does not exist. So they seeks to find ways to strengthen their defence should they actually be wrong and have to meet and be judged by their maker. Well then they have all the things they need; “God you didn’t make it obvious enough” or “you allowed us to prove and think that something can come from nothing” etc etc.

Of course God will just quote His inspired word the Bible;

“for man is without excuse seeing from what has been created the power of God.”

If God Exists, Who Created God?

You will often hear the argument; “well if God exists, then who created God?” as if it is a legitimate question to ask. This is a legitimate question until you stop to think for a moment about it, whereupon the question itself is seen to be meaningless and not even a logical question to ask. Why?

Here’s how to answer this question; “well who created God?”

Answer: Fact; God must be infinite – timeless by definition – of He is not a God. If so-called ‘God’ or ‘Gods’ were created, then they are not in fact Gods at all – they are created beings by whatever ‘God’ is.

By definition, you can only have one all-powerful, omniscient God/being – you cannot have two or three or four ‘Gods’ that have a kind of power-sharing agreement – otherwise these ‘Gods’ are not in fact real God’s at all, they are at best, semi powerful and labelled ‘Gods’ purely to describe perhaps awesome power but they are by no means all powerful – i.e God.

So if a real God does exist, then He must have existed forever or not at all – period, so the question; “who created God” self destructs. In other words – if God does exist, He MUST exist in an infinite, timeless realm we cannot comprehend – otherwise he is not God and just like us!

So now, knowing we cannot see or ‘touch’ a God that is really an infinite God, it just remains to be discovered if man can or cannot step outside our finite realm into the infinite to understand God, by I rather think that God would not leave that option open to us – lest armed with the full knowledge of infinity and creation we not only mess up the world and bring it to the brink of destruction, that we totally destroy ourselves.

How Jesus Could Have Walked on Water

Jesus Christ of Nazareth on the cross at Calvery

What are the chances of Jesus walking on water for real? Not as slim as we used to think according to new research! Did you know that some scientists are now considering the idea that our existence and the entire cosmos may be one of many universes, and that the entire thing may just be a digital hologram?

Well whilst this may not turn out to be the case, it sure does mean we no longer have simply the option of believing that jesus walked on water in some ‘impossible’ way and that what he did may be entirely possible with a God who has created a cosmos more akin to a 3D modelling program or photoshop than hard matter made of physical atoms!

Perhaps God can by simply adjusting the numbers by speaking into his on his huge heavenly rendering console, and adjusting the gravity, weight, hue and transparency of am immortal body, make it do anything he pleases without so much as a sneeze! Too far fetched? Not according to the scientists. Well of course they leave out a creator but they do now admit that the kind of digital holographic scenario (one that science fiction writers have imagined for decades) might actually exist!

Do All Religions Lead To The Same God

Don’t all religious beliefs take you to the same God in the end?

It’s a nice thought isn’t it.. that all religions, beliefs, religious ideologies, faiths and denomination and sects within those beliefs ultimately bring you to the same God! Ted Turner thinks so and he’s a really clever and nice chap you could trust isn’t he! You know the guy that believes in world depopulation. You first Ted!

So – is Bhudism better than shamanism? I Catholicism better than traditional Church of England?… what is the the Church of England anyway?… Surely they all lead to the same God? Not so fast!

The truth is, until not so long ago myself included, most Christians today don’t even know how their own church came into being, and have no idea where the rituals and religious beliefs of their particular denomination arose from. Here we discuss these vitally important issues.

Was Jesus God?

Jesus Christ of Nazareth on the cross at Calvery

The standard Christian view for this for most denominations is yes – Jesus was God manifest in flesh. But numbers of adherents to a belief do not mean that something is correct. And you will have to make your own mind up about this. To try to answer this, let’s look at Bible. One thing I would say at the outset is that if Jesus was God, it would be totally out of character to say; “I am God – worship me.” Jesus was humble in all his dealings and in some instances refused to say who he was or what he was doing and often deliberately hid certain facts from those who he knew had hardened their hearts.

Isaiah 9:6King James Version

For unto us a child (human) is born, unto us a son (man) is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor (name for Holy Spirit), The mighty God (this man will be called God), The everlasting Father (The name for God the Father), The Prince of Peace.

God speaking; “And they shall look upon me whom they pierced.” (Jesus was pierced).

“Acts 20;28; “Be shepherds of the church of God which he bought with his own blood.”

From The Bible; John1:1; The word was God and The Word was made flesh.”

Words straight from from the Bible 1 Timothy 3:16; “God was manifest in the flesh.”

From The Bible; “Because you a mere man, claim to be God.”

So is not this referring to God the Father who is not fleshly as we are – but the Bible tells us is Spirit, coming to earth and for this would need a fleshly shell in which to be seen by other human eyes – a vessel – a human body in which to reside, just as our spirits have a fleshly body to reside in? God in flesh. The Word (The Word was God) become flesh?

1 Timothy 3:16 King James Version
“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”

Psalm 22 Verse 18. Old testament prophecy (God speaking through Prophet):
“They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.”
Commentary: It would appear that if God is speaking about Jesus’ garments and refers to them casting lots for ‘my’ garments. Unless I am reading this wrong – God is speaking of Jesus as himself in bodily form on the cross.

Is The Bible Historically Accurate?

Is The Bible accurate in what it says from a historical viewpoint?

open-bibleonwhiteHistorical and Archaeological Reliability Many critics have challenged the historical accuracy of the Bible and have been proven wrong. Here’s one example. Historians questioned the accuracy of the accounts surrounding Pontius Pilate’s crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate found nothing wrong with him and was reluctant to crucify an innocent man. The Jews put pressure on Pilate saying if you refuse this “you’re no friend of Caesar” (John 19:12). At which point Pilate gave in to the Jews. This did not fit historical records we had of Pilate who was a cruel and dominating man, not likely to give in to a group of Jews whom he hated. Many believed that this account was historically inaccurate because of the way in which it portrayed Pilate.

books-stackedBuy books on the authenticity of The Bible at AMAZON >>


Recording the historical events of history

Later it was discovered that Pilate had been appointed by a man named Sejanus who was plotting to overthrow Caesar. Sejanus was executed with many of his appointees (Delashmutt, Sejanus, p. 55, 56). This demonstrated that Pilate was in no position to get in trouble with Rome. The Jews had him in a corner. If word returned to Rome that Jerusalem was in rebellion, Pilate would be the first to go. The gospel account was confirmed as accurate.

Many parts of the Bible have been challenged with the same result. Later archeology confirms the reliability of the biblical records down to the smallest detail. A respected Jewish archaeologist has claimed that,

“It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference.” (Shelly, p. 103). This is a strong statement for any archaeologist because if it were not true, he would quickly be condemned in his own field.

The conclusion that one draws from this material is that the Bible is a reliable historical document. Its accuracy has been proven numerous times. Its historical inaccuracy has never been demonstrated. So that when we approach the Bible, we do so with confidence that it records what actually happened. In which case we need to come to terms with the Bible’s claims. We can’t dismiss it out of hand because we were not there.

How do we know anything historically?

There is no “scientific” proof that Lincoln was the president. We cannot recreate him, bring him back to life or reproduce the experiment. We cannot calculate an equation that tells us that he was. But we can assert with a high degree of probability that Lincoln was indeed president and was assassinated in 1865. We do this by appealing to historical evidence. Many people saw Lincoln. We have some of his writings and even his picture, not to mention his face on our pennies. But none of this “proves”, scientifically that Lincoln ever lived or was the president.

The kind of evidence used in historical research is the same used in a court of law. In a courtroom case certain kinds of evidences are appealed to in order to determine what exactly happened, eyewitnesses are questioned, motives are examined, and physical evidence is scrutinized such as fingerprints or journal writings.

The evidence we have for Christ’s life, death, and resurrection is not as great as that for Lincoln, nor as recent But it is better than we have that Plato ever lived, or Homer, or many historical figures that we take for granted.


Christianity Introduction | The resurrection of Jesus Christ |Christianity and miracles | about Jesus Christ | The Bible authentic and was it accurately translated?

Copyright 2001