Just this morning, I read a news article via Yahoo about a debate among physicists regarding what "nothing" really is (Read it here: NOTHING). It seems that these scientists are trying their best to prove that "nothing has the ability to create". I can understand why they did the debate. Most scientists claim that everything in the universe started from a small dense point called a singularity that expanded and spun until it exploded (big bang), sent materials all around space that became the foundations for the evolution of many things around us. No God was involved in the creation of things. Simply put, for them, "nothing created everything." Now this is an insult to their intellect because science does not support such claims that nothing could create something. And so, scientists deny their best to dismiss that this is their claim although it is clear that this is their belief.
Now, it seems that these scientists cannot anymore elude the accusations against them that this is what they believe. They can't deny anymore that this is the bedrock of everything that they hold true. And so, they are now coming out and saying that "Yes, nothing was instrumental in bringing things to existence". But they are also saying that "nothing is something". And because it is "something", it can start a process of creating. One physicist in the debate made this point, ""If laws of physics still apply, the laws of physics are not nothing." Hey! If there was nothing then how can laws of physics be present. Laws of physics always involve matter and space, so how then can it be in play when in the first place there was nothing? But another physicist argued that nothing "...has a topology, it has a shape, it's a physical object". If that's the case, then my question is, what's the topology and shape of nothing to make it a physical object?
One theoretical physicist, Lawrence Krauss of Arizona State University, got it right when he said that the closest to nothing you can get consists of no space at all, and no time, no particles , no fields, no laws of nature. But philosopher Jim Holt disagreed and said, "Is that really nothing?" There's no space and there's no time. But what about physical laws, what about mathematical entities? What about consciousness? All the things that are non-spatial and non-temporal." Well, Mr. Holt. There are no laws, mathematical entities and consciousness, no non-spatial and non-temporal things when there's nothing. Even a child knows that.
Romans 1:21-22 explains well what these clever scientists are doing, "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools." Everywhere, God shouts, "I'm here!" They see God's proof of existence everywhere but they so want to make themselves wiser by saying that science can explain how the universe came into existence, and you don't need God in the equation. Well, God is not just part of the equation of how the universe came about. He is the Equation. He is not nothing. Actually, His presence fills every part of the universe in how He has placed order and reason in everything. And because they are trying to deny the truth of God as the sole agent for creation, these scientists are becoming fools.
Dennis Aglosolos, the Director of Living Waters - Asia, will be answering questions.