Return of the God Hypothesis: Breakthroughs in Physics, Cosmology, and Biology Seeking Evidence for the Existence of God

by Stephen C. Meyer

Sean Carroll, one of the most prominent proponents of naturalism, has acknowledged that naturalism has not explained the origin of the universe, precisely because it can offer no cause capable of producing it. He suggests, however, that the origin of the universe does not necessarily require a causal explanation; it might “just be.” Nevertheless, because the evidence indicates that the universe has not existed infinitely, but instead began to exist, it would seem to require—by the principles of causality and sufficient reason—a cause. Saying otherwise undermines one of the basic presuppositions of scientific investigation and indeed of reason itself, namely, that “whatever begins to exist must have a cause.” Philosopher William Lane Craig (Fig. 12.4) brought this point home forcefully in an interview I conducted with him several years ago. He pointed out that saying the universe might have popped into existence uncaused for no reason at all is no different from saying that a freight train or a Bengal tiger might have done so. Though, he pointed out, there was no way to disprove such possibilities, reason and the scientific investigation of the world depend upon the opposite assumption—that all such material events do have causes. He said those who deny this principle and who yet also decry the reasonableness of theism “should, therefore, forever be silenced.”18