Proving God--the Teleological Argument
Genesis 1
וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֗ים יְהִ֤י מְאֹרֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהַבְדִּ֕יל בֵּ֥ין הַיּ֖וֹם וּבֵ֣ין הַלָּ֑יְלָה וְהָי֤וּ לְאֹתֹת֙ וּלְמ֣וֹעֲדִ֔ים וּלְיָמִ֖ים וְשָׁנִֽים׃
14. God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate day from night; they shall serve as signs for the set times—the days and the years;
וְהָי֤וּ לִמְאוֹרֹת֙ בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם לְהָאִ֖יר עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַֽיְהִי־כֵֽן׃
15. and they shall serve as lights in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth.” And it was so.
וַיַּ֣עַשׂ אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־שְׁנֵ֥י הַמְּאֹרֹ֖ת הַגְּדֹלִ֑ים אֶת־הַמָּא֤וֹר הַגָּדֹל֙ לְמֶמְשֶׁ֣לֶת הַיּ֔וֹם וְאֶת־הַמָּא֤וֹר הַקָּטֹן֙ לְמֶמְשֶׁ֣לֶת הַלַּ֔יְלָה וְאֵ֖ת הַכּוֹכָבִֽים׃
16. God made the two great lights, the greater light to dominate the day and the lesser light to dominate the night, and the stars.
וַיִּתֵּ֥ן אֹתָ֛ם אֱלֹהִ֖ים בִּרְקִ֣יעַ הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם לְהָאִ֖יר עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃
17. And God set them in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth,
וְלִמְשֹׁל֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם וּבַלַּ֔יְלָה וּֽלְהַבְדִּ֔יל בֵּ֥ין הָא֖וֹר וּבֵ֣ין הַחֹ֑שֶׁךְ וַיַּ֥רְא אֱלֹהִ֖ים כִּי־טֽוֹב׃
to dominate the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that this was good.
This, for all intents and purposes, is the teleological argument. If there is a reason and a purpose, something gave it that. The purpose of the sun and the stars is to tell time and to give light. Time did not exist before creation, as time does not exist in reference to God. Aristotle wrote that time is the measure of change, and since God does not change, time is an irrelevant concept pertaining to God.
To me, the goal of physics is to uncover the laws of the physical world. If there are laws, according to the teleological argument, there must be a lawgiver. Laws are promulgated to create order. The opening account of creation in Genesis 1 expresses that. We see the evolution of the universe from chaos, תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ, to a universe that is good. There was a reason for the Earth being the exact distance it is from the Sun. Any closer or any further away, life could not exist. It is our Godilocks planet, just right.
A number of years ago, religious conservatives tried to have "intelligent design" taught in biology classes as an alternative to Darwin's theory of evolution. I have a problem with that. Biology is a science. Its conclusions are based on empirical evidence. Intelligent design, an aspect of the teleological argument, is a philosophical concept. I have no problem with it being taught in a philosophy class, but not in a biology class.
Is intelligent design, like the teleological argument, true? To be true, must it be proven? Is the Hebrew Bible true? That is a question we will examine. Saadia Gaon, an early Jewish philosopher, said that unanswerable questions can only be answered by logic. Is it logical that the complexities of life on earth were the result of a random, accidental process, or was it designed?
I do not understand quantum physics. I have tried, but it is still beyond me. Quantum physics says that randomness is a quality inherent in nature. If there is randomness, then maybe we just got lucky to be alive here on the earth. People who have faith find that hard to believe.
Comments