Deism in terms of Chronological Progression

 

            Perhaps the Greeks weren’t too far off when they wrote of the God Chronus as the God of time, as well as the uppermost being in the hierarchy of Greek Gods.  Could God truly control time?  Or perhaps, could God exist solely as what we claim to know as time.  We know today that these mythological beings were a mere product of their time-—an era characterized by great philosophical and intellectual prowess.  Although the Gods they wrote of may not exist, the parables they present us with could allegorize some of their most principal beliefs regarding the metaphysical.  By way of prodigious strides in philosophical and scientific academia, the present world has been able to establish a foothold in this soil of satiety that entails unfettered knowledge of this concept termed God. 

If one were capable of truly knowing the nature of God, the ideas in this composition would be stricken meaningless.  We know though, that this feat has never been accomplished and quite likely never will.  Some may assume that any one philosopher, scientist, writer’s opinion is as established as the next.  The notion of “one step back, two steps forward” as well as Ockham’s Razor (to a lesser extent) tells us the opposite.  By utilizing these methods of deduction, one can come to a more workable solution.

The search for a tangible superior being is one that has intrigued intelligent human life since the earliest civilizations.  Although every philosopher and scientist claimed to have an answer, the basis for each was just as founded as the next.  During the Middle Ages in Europe, philosophers were tentative about their ideas connecting science and spirituality.  When scientific truths were presented, they would often contradict scripture; this dissonance would ultimately lead to conflicts, within the dissenter as well as externally with his peers.  No scientific approach to defining God could possibly satisfy the masses.

            One of the earliest correlations between religion and science came with the unification of the Polemic system with the written scripture.  The Greek philosopher Ptolemy had postulated that the Earth was the center of the universe.  This idea of geocentricity satisfied the requisites placed by scripture on theories of its type.  As such it was generally accepted by Christians; although many remained skeptical of such a model.  Ptolemy’s model showed that the planets, sun, and stars revolved about the Earth in spherical motion.  Because of this idea, the concept of Heaven and Hell existing outside the realm of these spheres remained a feasible one.

            Eventually, Ptolemy as well as other scientists recognized the inherent flaws in such a model and therefore sought to reinvent it.  Nicholas Copernicus was the first scientist who was able to successfully accomplish this task.  Under Copernicus’ model, the sun was at the center of the universe.  This theory greatly conflicted with scripture.  Psalms 93 proclaimed “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm”.  However, Copernicus’ model showed the Earth in a circular orbit about the sun.  His hypothesis was more clearly polished than Ptolemy’s, holding exception to the fact that the predicted orbits differed at times from those observed from Earth.  Johannes Kepler solved this problem by decreeing that the orbits were elliptical rather than circular.

            These theories were hard to swallow for most Christians in Europe at that time.  By assuming that they could be true, one would have to accept that man no longer held his influential position as the most central being in the universe.  This unfortunate consequence can be outweighed if one considers a unique principle conveniently labeled the anthropic principle.  This principle provides that the universe was made the way it was so humans could be able to exist and evolve into intelligent beings.  If this were so, we could imagine that the universe was created in order to situate human life.  One can easily understand how this principle could re-establish man’s significance in the universe.

            This “anthropic principle” portrayed man as the dominant figure who has great significance within his universe.  These ideals characterized the three post-Newtonian centuries in Western philosophy.  Scientists were swept up in a maelstrom of disbelief in God.  Serious questions were being raised regarding the idea of reconciling God with these new revelations.  Newton was hailed for his discoveries that revolutionized the scientific consensus on universal structure and motion.  People believed that this revolutionary idea of governing by scientific laws was superior to all beliefs.  They sought to apply scientific laws to all disciplines of philosophy.  Little did they know, even the prodigal Newton conjured up ideas, including the theory of additive velocities that today have been shot down by present day knowledge, specifically the special theory of relativity.

            Newton though, was not the only great mind of his time.  Prior to Newton other great scientist-philosophers took giant steps in scientific thought as well.  For the practical applications of exploring scientific discovery, thought shall be defined as a postulation that has or once has had significant scientific basis.  The great mathematician Descartes was successful in proposing his idea of coordinate geometry.  Another influential philosopher, first of his type, was Thomas Hobbes.  The vast extent of his knowledge allowed him to make conclusions on both political and scientific fronts.  Hobbes believed that in order to be part of the universe, anything must have body.  Hobbes had also assumed that everything that exists is matter.

            The beliefs of Descartes and Hobbes produced great consideration and contradiction.  Modern science has shown that although energy is not matter, it does exist, is equivalent to matter and is a significant constituent of the universe, as we understand it.  Photons of light radiate throughout the universe and although they have no mass, we can certainly tell they exist because we see them.  This theory though, should not be totally discredited because of its importance when dealing with the existence of a superior being.  When one analyzes the ideas presented by Hobbes, an important question to ask is: “Does time have body?”  The obvious answer is “no” this then leads us to the conclusion that time does not exist in this universe, according to Hobbes.  If time exists outside of the universe, it can be assumed that it is superior to it because it is only one of its kind.

            Here we delve into a myriad of potential philosophical inquiry.  Ontology, the investigation into the question of what exists and the nature therein, can best be utilized when discussing such a matter.  Being in possession of the information contained within this composition, one can ask several profound questions regarding the state of God.  One can now ask, “If something is beyond the extent of our comprehension, mustn’t it be superior?”  In this sense, comprehension is the ability to understand completely.  Although there are subjects that some people can not comprehend, when we speak of comprehension here we refer to it as something that the population can not possibly grasp, God and time being of this type.  God is incomprehensible because we have none of the like to compare him to; therefore we can not form a complete unified image of him.  Time, on the other hand, can be described in minutes, hours, light years; however, do we understand time?  Why can time, unlike other things, never be conserved?  And if time and God are equally unique in their complexity, are they also equal in existence?  It is quite overwhelming.

            To fully understand how time and God are related one must be aware of the total body of knowledge available.  Two important philosophers whose scientific contributions should be emphasized and adequately contrasted are Newton and Descartes.  Both of which have invented a basis for mathematics: calculus we owe to the former and geometry to the latter.  The effect of these contributions in mankind’s understanding of the universe is immeasurable.  Both Newton and Descartes also expanded the knowledge of the universe through their theories about it.  Their names have become a cornerstone in astronomy and physics, not only do we hold their postulates in the highest regard, they also have two important adjectives Newtonian and Cartesian bestowed upon them.

            It is by the mathematics that we can begin to fully understand the universe within which we live.  Mathematics serves as a universal language to man.  Without boundaries it can readily transcend time, space and dimensions.  As the wise pupil of philosophy Plato once wrote, “Let no one enter here who is ignorant of mathematics”, it is important to examine how mathematics can function to explain our existence. 

We know by mathematics, that matter can exist in a theoretical four-dimensional world (not including the parallel dimensions in which field-mediating particles are thought to exist).  These four dimensions are labeled x, y, z, and the time dimension.  Present knowledge tells us matter and energy can move across the three dimensions x, y and z.  It however, can not move backwards in time, only forward.  Therefore it can be said that time is an inviolable domain: one that us, humans, being imperfect beings can not begin to comprehend.

            This being said, one can mathematically prove that time is perfect.  However there is more than just mathematical logic behind such a declaration as “Time is perfect”.  Science also serves to justify such an idea.  Plato believed that life was spontaneously generated, going from a disordered state to an assembled state with only the help of normal physical laws.  Despite Plato’s sapient nature, today’s Laws of thermodynamics dictate that all systems will tend to increase in disorder.  In the sense that we require, disorder can also be caused by friction, this friction causes all systems to come to a halt.  There are no “closed” systems (systems that can be classified by movement: pendulums, bouncing balls, etc…) that can remain in motion forever at the same rate of motion.  Such a device is termed perpetum mobile (Latin for perfect machine or system).  All “closed” systems experience this tendency to go towards chaos.  However, time does not.  Time moves at a relative rate all the time: time can not be paused, slowed or stopped in a universal frame. 

It could therefore be argued that time is infinite and thus does not meet the criteria for that of a “closed” system.  Then the most-worthy rebuttal would be one that states that both the 13^th century philosopher Thomas Aquinas, and Einstein in his special theory of relativity claimed that time has a definite beginning and ending.   Another idea to consider is that of Newton’s, in which he declares that the universe is a giant machine.  A machine, by definition, is a closed system.  The universe is definitely all encompassing, therefore everything that exists therein must also follow the laws set forth or laws similarly shaped.  This would provide that time, being an element of the universe, would also be a machine, or a “closed system”.

In one important conjecture, both the philosophers Anselm and Descartes believed that God is the greatest and most perfect being.  Here now is equivalence: time is perfect just as God is perfect.  Time can no easier be transcended than can be stopped, time is the most perfect closed system.  So what better connection could one envision?

One possible conclusion that the philosophical writer Paul Kurtz provides for us is that God is the total sum of scientific laws governing the universal body within which we exist.  This is an appealing theory, but its assumptions create some particular voids.  The Bible is a body of laws; thus it could also be that God is one and the same, in context.  This is an ineffective philosophy; no single mind can know the total body of laws governing science and in effect would never be able to truly know “God”. 

  Leibniz believed that God had created a perfect world where free will is apparent in all societies.  Kurtz believes that God’s existence is less feasible because of the fact that corruption and killing exist in our world.  Leibniz believed that this evil must exist in order for free will to be.  Evil was the manifestation of a world, created by God, where free will is the principal trait.  This philosophy would counteract Kurtz’s belief, thereby making it generally a less genuine argument. 

Kurtz’s insistence on the inability of miracles to occur also exposes a potential argument for the existence of God.  Before one can understand the implications of this idea they must comprehend the underlying circumstances present in the situation to be dealt with.  The creation of man is undoubtedly the most unique situation and can easily be granted the title of miracle.  For all practical purposes, we can use probability in mathematics to ascertain the immense possibility of the existence of perhaps one true miracle.  Biology, the study of living things, requires that deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) consist of thousands of proteins and nucleic acid structures.  Because of the specific nature of DNA, it can be inferred that any aberration from the protocol DNA sequence would not produce DNA. 

By using the mathematical device, permutation, one can conceivably predict the total amount of possible sequences if one were in possession of the knowledge necessary to make such a prediction.  Although this composition won’t explore the derivation of the number, it has been determined that the odds of producing proteins randomly is approximately 1 in 10^{40 000}.

Not only is the formation of DNA an enigma, but also the fact that of all the planets in our solar system DNA flourished on perhaps the only inhabitable planet, Earth.   If it were to have been planted on Venus, the exhaustive atmosphere and incredible heat would most likely have prevented any intelligent life from developing.  Mars’ increased distance from the sun makes it a more likely candidate than Venus.  However, Mars’ lack of sufficient atmosphere and unfavorably cold temperatures would have also inhibited the creation of intelligent life forms. 

For one to imagine this type of fortuitous consequence as the result of mere luck is recklessly pushing the envelope of chance.  Instead, it is more ideal to assume that this creation be considered a “miracle”.  No ignorance is required here, only understanding that if one true miracle exists, it is this, the creation of man.  God is the catalyst for such a miracle.  If even a divine force was not present in such an equation, we can still have the predilection that time was the driving factor, necessary for such a miracle to occur.  Only after trillions of years could the increased probability of life’s creation be evident.

 In this profound sense, God could conceivably be analogous to what the Greek philosopher Aristotle considered form.  Form was what could make matter into what it was.  By assuming God takes the role of form, then the creation of man can be considered the work of such a God, known to some as a miracle.  Isaac Newton believed God had created the Universe and walked away.  It could also be practical to interpret this in a mathematical sense, imagine this: God (time) created the Universe and walked away, in other words, time severed from the three spatial dimensions at the creation of the universe.  It is a perplexing hypothesis, but not an illogical one.

With the manipulation of a few philosophical ideologies and scientific proofs, a case can surely be made that at the least, time is an instrument of God.  It is not too difficult to imagine or invent a conjecture that fills the requirements set forth by certain proofs.  For all that is certain in this Universe where we believe only one line can be parallel to another line through a point perpendicular to the line, much is yet to be unraveled.  In an age where we have not convincingly united the forces of nature with the particles that occupy it, it is hard to assume anything about the true origin of time, space or matter.  These questions are best left alone to inquiring minds.  The stones of science have surely been discovered, it is only when we can turn them, will we truly be able to asses the essence of what God is and what role he played, and is likely still playing, in the evolution of the universe.