The Argument from Bigness

9 12 2011

It’s simple, actually. Let’s assume, just for the sake of argument, that God exists. Then let’s assume, as any physicist will tell you, that there is much about the cosmos we simply don’t know, and much about the quantum world we don’t know, and likely never will. Prominent physicists will be happy to tell you about multi-dimensionsal universes (all 10 dimensions), about the backward and forward arrows of time, about quarks and the fate of super strings, about the mathematical properties of infinity, about α (aka “alpha,” aka the fine-structure constant)… They will regale you with the sheer wonderment of existence, of the inscrutability of dark matter, of all the things they still do not know and will never know.

If a God created all of this, then wouldn’t it stand to reason that the God who made all of this would be all the more inscrutable, all the more mysterious, infinitely unknowable? So… much… bigger.

Why do atheists insist on God’s non-existence based on their not being able to prove him, but then simultaneously sing the glories of all they cannot prove and likely will never know? It turns out, it isn’t because God cannot be proven that they insist on his non-existence, but because they don’t like to be beholden to a God, to a personality so much bigger than their insignificant lives, so much greater than all their limited and time-bound aspirations, who stands not only in love over their impoverished souls but in judgement over their tawdry lives.

The Argument from Bigness… it has a cold logic that no atheist can refute. Try as they may.




%d bloggers like this: