Monday: Leibniz’s Question
Many years ago, a German thinker and writer named Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz asked what is probably the most basic and foundational question possible: “Why is there something instead of nothing?”
How do the following texts answer Leibniz’s question? Genesis 1:1; John 1:1-4; Exodus 20:8-11; Revelation 14.6-7; Job 12:7-10.
Image © Lars Justinen from GoodSalt.com
It’s fascinating how in the Bible the existence of God is just assumed. Genesis 1:1 doesn’t start out with a bunch of logical arguments (though many exist) for the existence of God. It just assumes His existence (see also Exodus 3.13-14), and from that starting point, God as Creator, the Bible, and all the truth revealed in its pages unfolds.
The doctrine of creation is also foundational to any Christian education. Everything we believe as Christians, everything, rests on the doctrine of the six-day creation.
The Bible didn’t begin with a statement about atonement, or about the law, or about the cross, or about the resurrection, or about the Second Coming. No, it began with a statement about God as Creator, because none of these other teachings makes any sense apart from the reality of God as our Creator.
Hence, again, a biblical worldview must emphasize the importance of the doctrine of creation. This emphasis, too, becomes very important, because the teaching has faced a full-frontal assault in the name of science. Evolution – billions of years of life slowly evolving by fits and starts, all by chance – has all but destroyed faith in the Bible for untold millions. It’s hard to imagine a teaching more antithetical to the Bible and to the Christian faith in general than evolution. That’s why the idea that evolution can somehow be made to harmonize with the biblical doctrine of creation is even worse that atheistic evolution. It can’t be done, not without making a mockery of the Bible and of the Christian faith as a whole.
| God asks us to spend one seventh of our lives, every week, to remember the six-day creation, something He asks for no other teaching. What should that tell us about how foundational and important this doctrine is to a Christian worldview? |
(24)
Leibniz's name is very familiar to me. Let me tell you the story. When I was a computer science researcher we had a computer called Monad. The head of the project that I was working on had spent the first part of his working life as a theologian. in fact, he had a PhD in theology and his expertise in computer science came not from the academic world but from hard work in the development labs of ICL. Somewhere along the line, he had lost his faith but he retained his deep roots in the philosopy of Leibniz. He developed the idea for a computer and used the name Monad for it. Leibniz lived in the era when scientists were just coming to grips with the nature of matter and had developed the notion of a particle called a Monad as an alternative to what we now accept as atoms. Now a Monad in Leibiz's view was an independent object that cooperated with other objects. I won't describe it more than that because I would need to take about 30 pages and most of you would be lost after the first paragraph. Suffice it to say that some of the ideas of Leibniz's Monad were incorporated into the Monad computer.
The Monad computer in actual practice, when I was working on it, was a large printed circuit board, propped up by a couple of chairs with a large fan blowing on it to keep it cool. It was a beast to work with because it was back in the days before very large integrated circuits and the chips were all installed in plug-in sockets. The usual trick, when it stopped working was to switch it off, give all the chips a push and then switch it back on again. That usually worked - for a while.
Why am I telling you all of this? Well, in spite of its frailty, the design and operation of the Monad computer, reflected the philosophy and design implied in the orginal Monad idea expressed by Leibniz.
In today's modern world the original idea of the creator should be expressed in his creatures even though they are frail and subject to failure. Just as we were able to look at the Monad computer and see Leibniz, the creator of the idea, so we too should be able to look at creation now and see the handiwork of the creator God.
Germane to this notion is the idea that the creator and his creation are not separate entities but are an integrated whole. I don't mean that, in the sense of pantheism but in the sense that we should not think of the natural and supernatural (spiritual) realms as separate and distinct.
For us, the takeaway message is this: If we want to win the argument about the Creator God, then we who claim that God created us need to recognise that our lives are the only argument that will ever make sense. Otherwise, as I have said previously, our words are just noise.
Hello Maurice - very interesting to read the analogy you shared, thank you! I agree with your statement that "the creator and his creation are not separate entities but are an integrated whole" - Spirit/energy is/governs all matter!
This differs from the materialistic world view in which is claimed that matter 'can' govern itself, that it does not need an intelligence 'behind the scene' and that it has 'inherent' intelligence.
May I share my thoughts which came to mind as I read your observations. As I understand the Christian worldview, it places our 'God', the great I AM, the Alpha and Omega in which is Beginning and End as the source/seat of the HOW, WHAT and WHY.
As you pointed out, this is not Pantheism, this is 'expressed' Intelligence, stating this with "reflected in the philosophy and design implied in the original Monad idea expressed by Leibniz". God, I AM, Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End contains everything that *IS* and the *potential* of everything that *might be*.
I think we need to make is very clear that the relationship between the Creator and the created is not a pantheistic one. I was perhaps a little loose in my use of "integrated" is my original statement. And Brigitte, your statement, "Spirit/energy is/governs all matter!" would be interpreted as pantheistic in some circles even if you did not intend it.
My use of the Leibniz/Monads example was to show that the design reflected the intentions of the designer. That is by looking at the design we learn something about the designer. A portrait painter reveals not only their subject but also a little about themselves and how they perceive their subject. That is why, we can look at a painting and see that it was painted by say, Rembrandt.
Existence is not God, but He has his mark on it!
Yes, indeed – Leibniz’s question goes to the heart of the matter. However, he does not ask how, when or what – He asks WHY. This is where the adherents of the differing worldviews find their impetus to argue their rational for their philosophy to be the ‘right’ one – giving so the implied meaning to life’s existence.
No one can present evidence to define the ‘WHY’ at the moment of 'Beginning', so everyone is allowed to speculate. And so it should be – man will arrive at conclusions based on many factors and this is man’s right when exercising the freedom of thought-expression; everyone deserves a hearing!
Christians, evolutionists, atheists etc. all form doctrine around the act of the Beginning, so with including postulates to answer ‘why’ and/or 'how'; and this is man’s prerogative as he exercises the mind to think freely.
“A biblical worldview must emphasize the importance of the doctrine of creation.” The definition of doctrine is: “A believe or set of believes held or taught by a church, political party or other group.” So, the biblical worldview is among other doctrine offered which man can agree or disagree with.
As I see it, the wisdom of the world establishes a worldly theology attempting to rival Christian theology - theology studies the nature of God and religious belief. They declare their God to be nature and its presumed ability to create and maintain itself by establishing its own laws by natural, evolutionary, 'intelligent' selection.
Our God is the intelligent Creator who is expressing Himself as personality from the Beginning, establishing the capacity of His Image to have Personhood (the quality or condition of being an individual person), of the process of creating and in the forces which governs His Creation – His unfathomable Love, Mercy and Grace - expressed as righteousness!
Man was given Jesus Christ – Emanuel – God with us - and will know the difference of the two worldviews when he EXPERIENCES(empirically) through faith by loving God with all his heart, mind, and soul desiring to live completely in His Father’s Will.
This replaces doubt with ever increasing knowing grounded in Love.
Today's lesson states, "It’s fascinating how in the Bible the existence of God is just assumed."
Regardless of the worldview that a person holds, when it comes to the foundation of that worldview, that foundation consists of presuppositions or assumptions that cannot be absolutely proven - at least at not this point in time. Thus, these presuppositions/assumption are accepted by a person by 'faith'. This notion is acknowledged by Paul in Hebrews 11:6.
Can I absolutely prove God exists and that He is the Creator of this world? No.
Am I personally convicted that God exists and that He is the Creator of this world? Yes.
But my belief/faith is based on assumptions. While I believe that those assumptions are evidence-informed, that too is on the basis of faith.
Jesus question recorded in the second half of Luke 18:8 is an interesting one if our postmodern era is perhaps close to the appearing of His second coming...
Hello Phil,
I would question the idea of faith being dependent upon assumptions. The Bible states it is based on "substance" and "evidence"(Ellen also states this). As you may know already, I believe that faith is our reaction to this evidence/substance, which God gives to "every man, the measure of faith"(Rom 12:3). Since God cannot give "faith"(or none would be lost), I conclude He has given evidence we can "measure"(metron) for exercising faith. We require no assumptions for faith, or it would be presumption.
Because as the lesson points out the fact of Creation is foundational to the Biblical Worldview it should be foundational to Christian Education.
When I was young we were taught that it was just a matter of faith verses scientific facts. Now there are Christian scientists who have shown that there are alternative explanations to the facts of how things developed that are aligned with what has been revealed in the Bible
I am not aware of what our young people are being taught in school these days, or even what is being shared with the adult members of our community of faith, but for myself I am glad I have had access to resources, videos, books and websites that assured me I am not ignorant for believing in Creation.
What I have found fascinating is the complexity of the human body, as in our image in the lesson, the eye or our DNA which is the code for life, to me just these two things already indicate the evidence of a Master Designer.
Faith makes all the difference. Without faith, God's existence itself disappears. For an unbeliever, all kinds of theories can be used to replace the force Who brings and holds things together. Faith makes all the difference...
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord....So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please.... Isa 55:8-13
No one can prove the existence of God, how he moves, created things etc, because we weren't there. By faith, after reading the bible or nature, we believe that the worlds were formed by the godhead, who is a Being and not a force/the big bang theory. The bible says six days creation and the seventh day is the day of rest.
It is impossible to please God without faith. He that cometh must believe that He is. Jesus said to the Centurion and the woman with the issue of blood that he had not found such faith in Israel, no not one.
Faith is the victory that will overcome the world. Heb 11:1-40.
Solution- Never give up in prayer for others.
What I have done-
I follow the biblical way, I encouraged people to pray, read and study and allow the Holy Spirit to have his way in both my life and their lives. I used my own life as an example and said they must be a living, moving Heavenly Father who hears us when we pray.
The question is "Why?", and could only be asked by one not familiar with the Creator and His Word. Also, how do we conclude that Genesis 1 "assumes" God exists?
As for the why, Genesis 1 reveals God concluding that
"it was good" at each step, and when finished, called it "very good". Also, Revelation 4:11 states that God made all things for His "pleasure"(desire, will). Much like an artist transforming a blank canvas to reveal his desire/will/pleasure, or a composer expressing his desire/will/pleasure through instruments of music.
Regarding the "assumption", I find it clearly stated that "God said". Nothing assuming about this. This is a clear statement of God(Elohyim: plural of El) at work, including the reaction and discussion between them, agreeing that it was "not good" for man to be alone. No assumption, only acknowledgment by one who seemed to have been observing God at work. Did Adam and Eve become afraid of and hide themselves from an assumption?
It is being said that no one can "prove" God exists. Well, try to disprove His existence, or listen to those who try. While I might not convince another to acknowledge God exists, I see the proof that God exists every day, and the evidence speaks to every soul, as God intends it should. No one on the last day will be shocked that God exists. The lost will only confess they didn't want to agree with the convincing evidence, and 2 Thess 2:10-12 explains why. Titus 2:11, 12 also states that "all men" have evidence of God existing, which we each accept or reject.