Does the theoretical possibility of nothingness ruin your day?

English: Full-sky temperature map taken by NAS...

If we go back in time far enough, everyone knows that we’ll come to a point where humans did not exist. Keep going back and even evolutionists agree there was a time the earth, sun, moon and stars were simply not here. Going further, we can easily conclude that everything that is must have had a beginning. The idea that everything-that-is had a beginning insists that there must have been a very first thing, which itself had a beginning. Prior to the beginning of the very first thing, can be only absolute nothingness.

If we subtract all-that-is from all-that-is there would be literally nothing at all left. Just like 1 – 1 = 0. The possibility of absolute nothingness, from a theoretical point of view, is obvious. From it comes the very real and necessary question, “How did the very first thing every come to be?”

A state of total nothingness is the mathematical equivalent to 0. The interesting thing about 0 is that there can never more or less of it. Even if we add, subtract, multiply and divide it with itself, the result will always be 0. Just as 0 will never produce anything more or less than 0 by itself, nothingness  will always perpetuate nothingness.  The theoretical potential for nothingness gives those who deny a Creator, an impossible logical hurdle to overcome.  While Creationists see no reason not to believe in the possibility of nothingness prior to a Creator creating the first something, Evolutionist are forced to take the completely unfounded and unprovable position that the possibility of nothingness does not exist. This is nothing short of a system of mathematics without the number 0. It obviously won’t work.

This is no doubt the reason behind the scientific community’s early rejection of the derogatorily named “Big Bang” theory. As Barry Setterfield points out,

“When the concept of an expanding universe entered the secular scientific arena, it was ridiculed. It was condescendingly nicknamed the “Big Bang”, even though the idea did not include any kind of explosion. It was rejected as being too close to the “silly ideas” of the Bible. Since the Bible was ‘clearly’ mythology, there was no way the truth of the cosmos could be allowed to come anywhere near what the Bible said happened.”

Science has longed for an explanation of the cosmos that does not require a beginning ever since.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s