Sorry about the detour through Logic 101, but, as you’ll shortly see, it’s necessary now.
First, I want you to know one thing: There’s noting wrong with over 99% of LambdaCDM [the atheist cosmology, first clearly defined, I believe, courtesy of S. W. Hawking]. That’s why it’s so widely accepted. It covers 13.7 billion years. There’s no problem with the the last 13.69 billion years when you get God involved. That’s better than 99.9% agreement. Where’s the problem?
Let’s look at Hawking’s starting point: The ‘Singularity’. Hawking defines it as a point without dimension. No height, no width, no length. Sound familiar? If you took high school geometry, you’ll recognize that as the definition of a point in Euclidean geometry. Hawking doesn’t point that out. Why? Because we all know that a Euclidean point is IMAGINARY! It’s a concept. It is not reality. Neither is the ‘Singularity’. A point without dimension isn’t real. It’s nothing! This means the atheists are now arguing what the theists have argued for better than 2,000 years. Now, the atheists claim the universe was created out of nothing. Nothing from Nothing. But that’s the very argument that the atheists rejected, correctly, when the theists made it so very long ago. [We know the universe didn’t come from nothing, right? It came from God’s energy according to e = mc^2 as we’ve already discussed. God used the same amount of energy as contained in 5 quadrillion quadrillion quadrillion A-bombs to create the universe.]
The singularity is supposed to be the universe at time zero. It does not and can not exist. Why do the atheists’ love it? Because, it gives them freedom to deny God’s involvement in the creation. Hawking says that the singularity is beyond the laws of the universe and therefore whatever happened after it, no one can know — not even God! Therefore, the universe cannot be the rational product of a superior being. Therefore, he says, the WATCH proves that the WATCHMAKER doesn’t exist!!!
See? Watch out for that first premise. The existence of the singularity is the first premise of LambdaCDM. If you grant it, God’s out of the creation process. But we know there was no singularity. We know: First, nothing comes from nothing, second, a point without dimensions is imaginary — it doesn’t exist, and, third, therefore, God was certainly ‘involved’ in the creation of the universe.
Once you examine that first premise, LambdaCDM is in big trouble. Q. Smith discusses this objection, but dismisses it by saying that the theists don’t ‘understand’ the cosmology. The cosmology defines the singularity as real. Therefore, he says that we may not say it isn’t real. But, that’s exactly how you attack their argument, right? Q. Smith recognizes that the singularity has no dimensions. Then, he has to explain the lawlessness [the avoidance of natural law] of the singularity. So he then describes this [imaginary] point that has no dimensions as a ‘violent, terrifying caldron of lawlessness’. [That is supposed to explain why the universe cannot come from a rational God.] Come on now Quentin, old buddy, how many ‘caldrons’ have you seen that don’t have 3 dimensions? You bet. The same as me. Not one. That’s why there is no singularity, no lawlessness.
Are we making progress? The singularity must go. Does that allow God to enter the cosmology? Not quite. Next time we’ll tackle the final problem with LambdaCDM.