What exists has to be either spirit or matter. Matter is roughly that which has parts that can be broken down into the parts that composed it. Spirit is a real entity that has no parts. The materialist feels that there is no such thing as spirit. There is only matter. The universe came either from spirit or matter. Spirit is that which has no composition, has no parts. Matter is what is made up of parts.


It is the case that there are dozens of explanations for how the universe came to be and for how it is the way it is.  It is also true that some think there are valid objections to all those explanations.  So all you can do is choose the best one – the one with the least objections that seem valid.  Anything involving spirit is out for the spirit theory is untestable and thus is just an excuse for not looking for an explanation.  Excuses can be disguised as explanations. For example, you can say that if antibiotics seem to cure diseases that it is some spirit in the antibiotics that is doing it.  Religion does not really want to go down that road.  It cherry-picks when it wants the spirit "explanation." It is hauled in to "explain" why we have a universe and limited to that. It abuses the spirit theory by doing that.  That is why the spirit theory cannot be taken seriously or considered to being about a theory.  It is just religious ideology.


Religion answers, "Science cannot say there is no natural explanation for why there is anything at all. It can only say it does not know of one."  What else can it say? It is ordering science to assume that spirit is a possibility while science cannot assume anything and must firmly stay with things that can be tested or have been tested.

All things certainly did not originate in Spirit.

Religion answers, “If everything has parts then no matter how small a part is it consists of parts and its parts are composed of parts and so on and on – ad infinitum. Only an infinite intelligence could put all things together. This intelligence cannot have parts for it is impossible for things to design themselves. It must be what was not designed – it can only be spirit. This spirit must have infinite power if it had the intelligence to make an infinite arrangement”.

Here is our answer. Spirit, being without division, is what it does. To make things a Spirit needs intelligence and the power to cause change at the very least. If it is the power to make it cannot be intelligence for intelligence is not the power to make. If it has x amount of intelligence and y amount of power then it must have parts or divisions in it. It has to be either one or the other. Yet to be able to create or make anything the Spirit needs to have these two powers. Spirit then cannot explain where all things have come from for it does not have the power to make anything. If it were hard to believe that matter alone exists it would be worse to believe in an outright contradiction such as Spirit being the origin of all things.

Spirit is its power to exist so it can’t do anything but exist and it cannot make angels, devils or souls. The notion of spirit creating all things or becoming all things is incoherent. It has to hold itself in existence so it is that power. It is all/entirely the power to exist for it has no parts and there is no other power so how could it be love or intelligence for these are different powers. The idea of spirit having any power to make anything or to know anything is preposterous. It is impossible for love cannot be intelligence or justice.

Each particle of matter may be made of further particles and these of different particles and so on ad infinitum when there are no partless entities. There is no beginner or bottom level of particles that can’t divide into further particles. Philosophers object that this leaves no ultimate reason why matter exists. But this is irrelevant when each particle is made up of others which are smaller and each of those of others that are smaller than these and on and so on…. The ultimate reason is that matter is infinite so that is that! They want a final reason, a reason to stop at, but that is as silly as looking for the very last number for there is no such number. Numbers have no end. Infinite space makes no sense to us and seems incomprehensible but we are just unable to grasp it. If space were not infinite it would be sillier in our vision.

Suppose Particles A consist of Particles B and Particles B consist of Particles C. Particles A causing Particles B and Particles B causing C and C causing A sounds ridiculous but it is rationally and scientifically possible. That avoids the infinite regress or need for the idea of infinite power being necessary to cause anything to exist. A ring does much the same thing. It will be objected that Particles A must exist before the rest but if you could do magic you could create the ring in a single moment.
Another way that is offered by physics and the wonderful Stephen Hawking to eliminate the regress is the idea that if you could go back in time to the moment of the big bang you then either pop out of existence or time starts going in the opposite direction (page 37-38, Doing Away with God?). Since time is so much like space according to modern science and space can change direction then why not time? Instead of beginning or being created it just moves in both directions. Time becomes something more like eternity the closer you get to the big bang and it loses the characteristics that demark it from space (page 37, Doing Away with God?). We must remember that though space and time are one in modern physics there has to be the kind of Newtonian space which is not a thing so you have space the thing inside space the non-thing. Because it is non-thing its existence cannot be proven experimentally but only rationally.
But let us try to deal with the question simply and briefly. There is a grain of sand. The particles A making it up could each be made of smaller particles b which each are made of particles c which are smaller and particles C could be made of particles A. This could be done though a space warp. So it leaves you with a material being that doesn’t need a creator for it depends on itself to exist though other beings can destroy it. However, it is not really destroyed but turned into something else.

Matter makes itself from matter in big bangs as in the way I said the particles were arranged and not out of nothing which would be impossible. This is why matter exists so we have answered the question, “Why is there something when there could have been nothing?” Atheists are accused of saying all things came out of nothing by themselves for there is no God when it would make more sense to say God made all things from nothing. But if all things can come from nothing there is no need for God.

We cannot understand matter or spirit completely. But we experience matter and we know it can exist and we do not know if spirit can exist therefore it follows that it is unreasonable to believe in spirit. You do not solve mysteries by resorting to more mysteries.

Suppose the reason that something exists when there could have been nothing is that it is self-causing. Remember we are not thinking of anything making itself before it existed which would be impossible but a being causing and existing at the same time. If something comes from nothing and makes itself before it makes itself then logically it has to exist in the same way that 1+1 have to be 2 for the nothingness needs it to exist and makes it exist and wants it to exist which it would not do unless it were absurd for there to be nothing. This is wrong for there is no reason why a speck of dust a million light years away should exist. It just does and that is all there is to it.
This might be answered by saying that the universe though many items is really one energy force in the ultimate analysis. So the speck of dust should exist not because it is a speck of dust but because it is a manifestation of the force.

No matter who says that reason or materialism can be disproved by science they should be ignored because reason is the method of science so science is only valid in so far as it is loyal to logic. There are things in nature which are not really the way they look. Science will never have all the answers and there is no reason to accept anybody’s interpretation of the incomprehensible things for it is only an interpretation. If one strange interpretation could be true then any could be true. All you can have for the incomprehensible things is interpretations and we don’t have to accept anybody’s interpretation for it is up to each one to interpret for himself or herself.

Even the most shapeless asteroid is made of matter that is in order. A few laws could make it do that. For example, infinite design of reflection results if you hold one mirror in front of another. 
A HISTORY OF GOD, Karen Armstrong, Mandarin, London, 1994
A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 6, PART II, KANT, Frederick Copleston SJ, Doubleday/Image, New York, 1964
A PATH FROM ROME, Anthony Kenny Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1985
A SHATTERED VISAGE THE REAL FACE OF ATHEISM, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, Louis Berkhof, The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 1971


AN INTELLIGENT PERSONS GUIDE TO CATHOLICISM, Alban McCoy, Continuum, London and New York, 1997
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill, & Son, Dublin, 1954
APOLOGETICS FOR THE PULPIT, Aloysius Roche, Burns Oates & Washbourne LTD, London, 1950
AQUINAS, FC Copleston, Penguin Books, London, 1991
ARGUING WITH GOD, Hugh Sylvester, IVP, London, 1971
ASKING THEM QUESTIONS, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936
BELIEVING IN GOD, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, Friedrich Nietzsche, Penguin, London, 1990
CITY OF GOD, St Augustine, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1986
CONTROVERSY: THE HUMANIST CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTER, Hector Hawton, Pemberton Books, London, 1971
CRITIQUES OF GOD, Edited by Peter A Angeles, Prometheus Books, New York, 1995
DIALOGUES CONCERNING NATURAL RELIGION, David Hume, William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London, 1907
DOES GOD EXIST? Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1982
DOES GOD EXIST? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1972
DOING AWAY WITH GOD? Russell Stannard, Marshall Pickering, London, 1993
EVIL AND THE GOD OF LOVE, John Hicks, Fontana, 1977
GOD AND EVIL, Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
GOD AND PHILOSOPHY, Antony Flew, Hutchinson, London, 1966
GOD AND THE HUMAN CONDITION, F J Sheed, Sheed & Ward, London 1967
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Philip St Romain, Liguori Publications, Illinois, 1986
GOD THE PROBLEM, Gordon D Kaufman, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1973
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 2, Frederick Copleston SJ Westminster, Maryland, Newman, 1962
HONEST TO GOD, John AT Robinson, SCM Press, London, 1963
HUMAN NATURE DID GOD CREATE IT? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1976
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
IN SEARCH OF CERTAINTY, John Guest Regal Books, Ventura, California, 1983
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V. Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
ON THE TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH, BOOK ONE, GOD, St Thomas Aquinas, Image Doubleday and Co, New York, 1961
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1940
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1942
REASON AND RELIGION, Anthony Kenny, Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford, 1987
SALVIFICI DOLORIS, Pope John Paul II, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
SEX AND MARRIAGE – A CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE, John M Hamrogue CSSR, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
TAKING LEAVE OF GOD, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1980
THE CASE AGAINST GOD, Gerald Priestland, Collins, Fount Paperbacks, London, 1984
THE CONCEPT OF GOD, Ronald H Nash, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1983
THE HONEST TO GOD DEBATE Edited by David L Edwards, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1963
THE KINDNESS OF GOD, EJ Cuskelly MSC, Mercier Press, Cork, 1965
THE PROBLEM OF PAIN, CS Lewis, Fontana, London, 1972
THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian ALS, Birmingham, undated
THE PUZZLE OF GOD, Peter Vardy, Collins, London, 1990
THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, Brian Davies, Continuum, London-New York, 2006
THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BELIEF, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930
THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
UNBLIND FAITH, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
WHAT IS FAITH? Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? LG Sargent, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Misc, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1985
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso, St Paul, Bucks, 1970
WHY WOULD A GOOD GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1990


No Copyright