The First Note...And Its Successor's

Above is a picture of a guitar I built for a friend of mine.  It consists of many parts and pieces.  Some more critical to its function than others.  It is built of exotic materials which are quite costly.  I built it with care, to as high a level of precision as I could muster, though it has many flaws.  If you spend over a year crafting one thing, you tend to know every millimeter of its being.  After overcoming a few relatively drastic failures, it was final finished.  I had strung it, set the action, and intonation (height of strings, and purity of note pitch).  I set it on a stand and looked at the finished product.  I was pleased.  As a perfectionist, I wasn't entirely satisfied, but pleased none the less.  There was however one thing missing.  The guitarist.  This is true with any instrument.  It must have its musician.  With out the force to pluck the strings, work the bow, or clash the symbols, the greatest of instruments are merely bits of organized matter.  You must have the musician to begin the first note, and its successor's.  To have a song you need multiple notes.  To have even one chord, you need three notes played together.  You must have a continual exertion of energy to keep the song going.  If I pluck just one guitar string, it will quickly dissipate leaving nothing.  The instrument, the music, needs a sustainer or else it ceases to exist.   By the way the other picture above is a Jewish musician named Paul simon who you may have heard of.  He is playing a James Olson guitar, who is one of the greatest Luthiers in the world and an inspiration to my own instruments.  Do you know what happens when Paul stops playing his guitar?  You guessed it.  The Sound of Silence!

Upon an initial dive into the world of quantum physics one can get very very very overwhelmed.  I know this is how I feel when I attempt to read even the most "accessible" work by physic's most renown P.H.D holders.  However, at a broad look, physics is primarily focused on the nature of particles and how they interact with one another.  Without getting too technical, so that I don't confuse myself, lets take a brief look at one law of physics.  The Law of Causation  says that for every effect, there must be a cause.  So when we think of the music, we must work back and find a musician causing the music.  The guitar, or violin are simply avenues for the music to be played.  The universe where we find ourselves is no different.  Even the smallest particles that we know of are moving, all be it unpredictably,  still moving.  So we have a "problem".  Even the most inorganic, seemingly insignificant, beyond microscopic particles need a cause.  They need a musician to get the song going.  Beyond the fact that they first need to exist, they then have to be plucked, played, moved into action.  However we can't stop there, because the Universe continues to be plucked, played, and moved into action.  There is a sustainer, a conductor if you will, to the most beautiful of symphonies.  This conductor also holds all the particles together, the notes if you will, so they don't go flying part from one another.  So this is the unmoved mover.  God himself.  Ah but you say, "Well then who caused God?"  Very good question.  The Law of Causation applies to physical non-eternal things.  Yes everything that has a beginning demands a beginner.  However, God did not have a beginning, so He does not need a beginner.  Again you may say "How convenient!  Well, I just say that the Universe is eternal, therefore it doesn't need a cause."  True, if the Universe is eternal, it does not need a cause, and God does not need to exist.  However, it is an undisputed scientific truth held by the most respected scientists such as Stephen Hawking that the universe had a beginning.  So one can believe that" Nothing" created something out of nothing.  Or that "Something" created something out of nothing.  Which is more reasonable to you?

If you enjoyed this please like and share.  Others need to know that our faith is not based on fairy tales and wishful thinking, but on the firm foundation of evidence.  

---