Cosmological Argument for God as Response to African Atheism: A Synthesis of Western Analytic and African Thought
a.
Introduction
b.
Defining Cosmology
The
African Philosopher Amaechi Udechi offers a concise definition of Cosmology in
the following manner: Since the term is rooted in the Greek kosmos for world and Logos for discourse,
“then it can be defined as the study of the origin, structure and development
of the world or universe in its totality.”[1]
Since the world consists of being, Udechi sees a link between cosmology and
ontology. This means that as much as we are attempting an objective study of
the universe, we cannot fail to be subjective in the least sense of the word.
This means that since everyone has their own worldview, then people will have
the right to agree and disagree with cosmological arguments for God. Writing
from a Philosophy of Religion perspective, Stephen Evans and Zachary Manis
similarly observe that these arguments “attempt to infer the existence of God
from the existence of the cosmos or universe.”[2]
c.
Western Analytic Perspective
i.
Introduction to Western
Analytic Cosmology
Cosmological
arguments in Western perspective have their roots in Greek thinking, especially
in the works of Plato and Aristotle with Thomas Aquinas in Medieval history
developing the argument in its current distinctive in Christian discourse.[3]
Thomas Aquinas shows his interaction with Aristotle’s idea of the prime mover, in his own words:
Everything that is in motion is put and kept in motion by some other
thing. It is evident to sense that there are beings in motion. A thing is in
motion because something else puts and keeps it in motion. That mover therefore
either is itself in motion or not.[4]
At
this point, Aristotle observes that two premises can be made: Either the mover
is in motion or not. For the latter, Aquinas claims that this “prime mover” is
God, since he is the one who is “the uncaused cause.” However, if it is the
former “then we have to go on to infinity, or we must come to some mover which
is motionless; but it is impossible to go on to infinity, therefore we must
posit some motionless prime mover.”[5]
In this section we shall look at William Craig’s kalam cosmological argument which utilizes scientific theory and
philosophical inquiry to prove the existence of God. This attribution to God is
given based on the idea of the contingency
of the universe: in other words from natural observations of the world,
there is “no explanation why there is something rather than nothing”[6]
hence everything that exists seems to have its existence dependent on something
other than the object itself.
ii.
William Craig’s Kalam
Cosmological Argument
This section takes
a dialogical format based on a conversation that may be typical concerning the
nature of the universe with an atheist:
Interviewee: How do you think it came into existence? As I said
earlier I simply don’t know, my concept of time is the usual and on a more
theoretical level time as we know it is simply a way for man to make sense of
his existence and senses, the universe I think doesn’t express itself in this
way I think there is nothing like before or after; just now whether our minds
can grasp it or not, and physics sort of tends to agree though I think I have
put it crudely . . . as Stephen Hawking argued asking what came before the big
bang is akin to asking show me a point south of the south pole . . .
Responses:
From the responses, the writer deduces his
presuppositions as follows: 1) He holds that the universe had a beginning, 2)
He attributes this beginning to empirical science, and 3) He does not believe
the beginning of the universe is personal.
The writer’s
responses to his presuppositions are as follows: 1) The interviewee believes
that the big bang is the beginning of the universe. In his Kalam Cosmological argument, William Lane Craig draws evidence from
the astronomer Hubble’s observation that “the universe is expanding but also
that it is expanding the same in all directions.”[7] The implication being that
if at some point in the past if the entire known universe was contracted down
to a single point, Craig postulates, “one finally reaches a point of infinite
density from which the universe began to expand.”[8] This initial event is what
has been called the big bang. To explain this, scientists propose the steady
state model and oscillation models, both of which “fail to fit the facts of
observational cosmology” Craig goes at length to prove. The second scientific
argument he uses is that “the second law of thermodynamics implies that the
universe had a beginning”[9]
that is, the idea that energy cannot be destroyed but is converted from one
form or the other. These arguments prove that the universe had a beginning, and
here we are in agreement with the interviewee.
2) The interviewee
clearly sides with the big bang theory. The last statement in his response
shows the inadequacies of empiricism (verifiable proofs) that is most
pronounced in the naturalism of Science. Empiricism, which can be defined as
reality being based on sense experience, fails because it cannot prove
everything. For instance, if I have a wife and I told my friend that I have a
wife, and he says I cannot prove it because he doesn’t see her, does this prove
that she doesn’t exist? Can we measure 3 kilograms of love? Does this nullify
or support the existence of love? Here the weakness of empirical science is
evident: It is insufficient on its own, to understand the nature of reality
because there are other fields that are necessary for the acquisition of
knowledge such as philosophy and theology. Hence empirical science is
single-handedly insufficient to articulate the nature of the universe.
3) It is possible
to give a proof that the beginning of the universe is personal and knowable.
The interviewee’s last statement in the response shows he does not want to
discover further what the cause of the big bang might be – he begs the question. Here we see the inadequacy
of scientism as discussed earlier. So far we agree with the interviewee that
the universe had a beginning. So the question is: is this beginning caused or
uncaused? Craig counters the second option based on the accounts of the famous
sceptic David Hume and the English philosopher C. D. Broad that suggest that
the universe could not have come into being without an uncaused cause and this
cause was in existence before and up to the moment when the thing in question
began to exist. This is ample philosophical and empirical reasoning to point to
the beginning of the universe. Here, scientists and Atheists have an
indifferent view to the implications, one of them acknowledging that ‘the big
bang model only describes the initial conditions of the universe, but it cannot
explain them’[10]
Science stops here, whereas further philosophical inquiry leads to a remarkable
conclusion: “It means that the universe was caused to exist by something beyond
it and greater than it. This ought to fill us with awe, for it is no secret
that the Bible begins with these words: ‘In the beginning, God created the
heavens and the earth.’”[11]
Finally, Craig disproves the idea of an eternity as the cause of the universe
because the implication would be that the universe is eternal. “Thus we reach
our conclusion: A personal creator of the universe exists, changeless and
timeless prior to creation and in time subsequent to creation. This is the
central idea of what theists mean by God.”[12] This affirms classical
apologetics argument in line with the Thomistic cosmological argument.
d. Contours
of African Cosmology
African
scholars Advice Viriri and Pascah Mungwini observe that in speaking of African
cosmology, the assumption is that Africa has a diversity of cultures and that
Africa is not completely homogenous “but reference is only being made to
dominant themes, in the sense of common generative themes in African cultures.”[13]
Whereas their article articulates an africanization and reconstruction
perspective, the points made are of benefit to this thesis: The idea that
Africans have their own worldview.[14]
An
African worldview assumed the existence of God and hence the claim that atheism
is a foreign concept. In addition to this, a hierarchy of beings constituted an
African metaphysical and epistemological foundation. In Igbo traditional
society for example, the cosmos is seen in a dual perspective: it is made of
the sea and the earth; the former comprising supernatural spirits and the
latter, human beings, animals, fish and vegetation – Yet these two concepts
have an interaction that maintains social balance.[15]
Here in Kenya for example, traditional Agikuyu society was cognizant of Mwene Nyaga/Ngai, that is God, and their
cosmological view is that He was the creator of the world. The fact that even
those who have converted to Christianity still have this name for God, and see
him as the all-powerful in their spiritual power displays show that this
African worldview is still alive. Similarly in West Africa, Udechi observes
that “the Igbo, for instance, can narrate how the world and man were created,
through the platform of Akiko-ifo,
(folktales) by saying that Chukwu-okike,
Chineke (God the creator) created Uwa (world) and Mmadu (human being).”[16]
Metaphysically,
man finds meaning as he interacts in the material world and views the
sacredness of the cosmos[17]
hence corroborating Mbiti’s altruism. As such, the African man performs his
duty in light of the presence of God: This holistic view sees the cosmos as the
habitation of God and hence man takes him everywhere in traditional society, to
his work, family and shamba. Some at
this point critique this as mainly myth and folklore. The rebuttal of the
author is that the protagonists of this view forget the place of both critical
and narrative methods of philosophizing.[18]
Myths are not a figment of the imagination of Africans but an interpretation of
reality.[19]
As such, these stories and myths are part of an African understanding of
cosmology and by extension, God.
Those neo-African
Atheists that see tradition as backward have lost touch with African reality
and worldview. Their cosmology is influenced by a Western hegemony,
individualism and imperialism which is heavily biased towards African thought
and also theism. African cosmology, centered on the African indigenous
philosophy of Ubuntu, view society
holistically “distinguishing features of this philosophy are its welfarism,
altruism, universalism and basically its utilitarian outlook”[20]
which are centred on the concept of God and cosmology. The renowned African
Theologian Mercy Amba Oduyoye interprets the Psalm “The fool says in his heart 'There is no God'” by concluding
that in traditional Africa there are no such "fools" for “In
traditional Africa, that is, Africa when people are being themselves, discounting
Christianity, Islam, and Western norms, God is experienced as an all-pervading
reality. God is a constant participant in the affairs of human beings.”[21] Elsewhere, A. B.
T. Byaruhanga-Akiiki observes that it is foolhardy to assume the non-existence
of God, on the grounds that research on African peoples in different languages
and with different names the existence of God is the norm.[22]
An opposition to this is an opposition to what being
African is: Severing the roots of a tree, leads to a withering of the leaves.
e.
A Synthesis of African and
Western Analytic Cosmology
Both
Western Analytic and African cosmologies argue for the existence of God. Much
can be said about these arguments but since we are limited here to a general
discussion, the above arguments are sufficient to affirm the thesis that
African atheists have an unfounded basis for not believing in God. The
conclusion is as a result of the following syllogism:
(1)
The critical African supports
the Cosmological Argument.
(2)
The Cosmological argument
supports the existence of God.
(3)
Therefore, the critical African
supports the existence of God.
The first premise
is founded on the idea that logical reasoning based on scientific inquiry and
philosophical reasoning supports the cosmological argument as has been seen in
the discussion of kalam’s cosmological
argument as well as the arguments in African cosmologies. The conclusion affirms the second
premise that the cosmological argument supports the existence of God. This
thesis has further gone to show that this God can be known, and here I add, can
be known from other epistemic justifications and arguments. Hence as a
conclusion, a critical African supports the existence of God both from an
analytic approach and from an African worldview. Therefore, African atheists
have an unfounded basis.
f.
Biblical Reflection as
Conclusion
What are we to
make of the fact that the existence of God can be supported by a cosmological
argument? The conclusion the writer seeks to make is that this God can be known
from a Biblical worldview. In summary, the Biblical Worldview offers the most
coherent understanding of the universe. Following the arguments presented
above, we appreciate the fact that the universe had a beginning and this
beginning is God. Genesis gives an account of creation and attributes it to the
power of God – It is easy to see how powerful God is, because if he is the cause
of the universe, then he must transcend it but not only that, he also is
immanent in it. And that is what makes him knowable. Generally, from
observations of the universe, we can infer the existence of God. Psalm 19:1-4.
“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his
hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display
knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their
voice goes into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world” and Romans
1:19-20 “since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has
made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible
qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being
understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” are a clear
indication of this.
How then shall we
know this God? Romans 1:18 reveals to us that man has suppressed this truth
because of his wickedness. It is possible to suppress something but not to
altogether get rid of it. And so through accepting this, we see that in order
to know God this wickedness has to be taken care of. Paul’s epistle to the
Ephesians says that “In him (Christ) we have redemption through his blood, the
forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace”[23]
and elsewhere “But because of his great love for us, God who is rich in mercy,
made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – it is by
grace you have been saved.”[24]
Therefore, we see
that God has already accomplished this for us, while we could not help
ourselves. It is good to note that this also is in the past, but with eternal
consequences and efficacy. Here we see that knowing God is not a higher
knowledge, or gnosis, but it is made available for all through Jesus Christ.
John 14:6-7 attests to this: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one
comes to the father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my
Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.” We know God
through believing in Jesus Christ, “Yet to all those who received him, to those
who believed in his name, he gave the right to become the children of God . . .
No-one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father’s side
has made him known.”[25]
Therefore, the cause of the beginning of the universe is God and we can know
him through believing in Jesus Christ who has made Him known.
[1] Amaechi Udefi, “Philosophy, Mythology and an African Cosmological
System,” in Global Journal of Human
Social Science, Geography & Environmental GeoSciences Volume 12, No. 20
(2012): 59
[2] C. Stephen Evans and R. Zachary Manis, Philosophy of Religion 2nd Ed.: Thinking about Faith (Downers
Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), 67
[3] Ibid., 68
[4] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa
Contra Gentiles tr. Joseph Rickaby, S.J.
(Grand Rapids, MI: Christian Classics Ethereal Library), Accessed July
2014, 24
[5] Ibid.
[6] Stephen Evans and Zachary Manis, 69
[7] William Lane Craig, The
Existence of God and the Beginning of the Universe (San Bernardino, CA:
Here’s Life Publishers, 1979)., 58
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid., 66
[10] Ibid., 85
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid., 89
[13] Advice Viriri and Pascah Mungwini “African Cosmology and the
Duality of Western Hegemony: The Search for an African Identity,” in The Journal of Pan African Studies, vol.3,
no.6 (March, 2010), 29
[14] The authors define cosmology as worldview.
[15] Amaechi Udechi, 62
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid. Udechi notes that Socratic philosophy similarly has this
critical and narrative dialogue. Hence, the argument of the backwardness of
African tradition based on western analytic approaches is misinformed.
[19] Jones M. Jaja, “Myths in African concept of reality,” in
International Journal of Educational Administration and Policy Studies, Vol. 6 2 (2014), 10
[20] Advice Viriri and Pascah Mungwini, 39
[21] Mercy Amba Oduyoye, “The African Experience of God through the Eyes
of an Akan Woman,” in Cross Currents, Vol 47 No. 4 (Winter 1997-1998), Accessed from http://www.aril.org/african.htm on November 2014.
[22] A. B. T. Byaruhanga-Akikii, “The African World Religion and Other
Religions,” in J.N.K. Mugambi and Mary N. Getui eds., Religions in Eastern Africa Under Globalization (Nairobi: Acton
Publishers, 2004), 31
Comments
Post a Comment