Turning nothing into everything. In the beginning was The Singularity, a single point of time (at zero point) and space, which was all at once all-encompassing and non-existent, infinitely dense yet technically without mass. A cosmic pustule stuck in the skin separating “existence” from “non-existence.” The singularity, which didn’t exist, exploded, sending massive amounts of matter and energy into existence, causing the beginning of the universe and time, creating all the forces such as gravity and magnetism and electromagnetism.
Where did The Singularity come from, and how did matter form from nothing? Perhaps from the infusion of light and immense heat. We know from particle physics, if we combine matter with anti-matter, it will annihilate each other and yield massive energy (heat) and a pair of photons. Theoretically, time being reversed, the reaction would be reversible. The Singularity, perhaps, formed in negative time.
The source of heat and light: The Scriptures describe God as radiant light, undetectable, immeasurable, timeless, and as far as we can understand, non-existent (non-created); “non-existent” and dwelling in “non-existence” (non-creation) — a being of such intense luminescence, a momentary glance will burn through your retinas and melt your brain.
Perhaps God, by infusing himself into The Singularity, ignited the Big Bang and set creation into motion.
So, why would such an all-powerful creator go through mysterious and enigmatic means to make His existence known? Why give us the “proof” in the form of a book or series of manuscripts, written by men, passed down through the ages in such a way as to call into question how any such process could qualify as “the words of God“? After all, anyone who’s ever lived, as it were, could’ve just as easily written such a fantastical tale, and have it passed down along to us in the form of legend or fable, as “origins of the cosmos.” Why not do something fantastic, like laser-out some indestructible platinum or create a holographic journal, or just pop in now and then to introduce himself physically?
Would people be more inclined to accept Scripture as “God-given” if it was contained in some sort of “magical” form of super-advanced technology? Or would the artifact itself become the primary focus? We have a remarkable tendency to worship “sacred objects,” whether they be “divine” or not. Memorabilia is a hugely lucrative industry. Such artifacts would be fought over and seen as god-like with mystical powers in their own right. Just look at the history of The Shroud of Turin, The Holy Grail, the Ark of the Covenant, and other such relics. We are prone to ascribe sacred power to objects and ignore the message or meaning behind their existence. Or perhaps such an object would become front and center on Ancient Aliens as proof that God is merely an advanced alien who visited in the ancient past.
And as for popping in and showing himself, doing “miracles” to prove he’s god, etc., I would refer you to the cinematic masterpiece, “Star Trek V, The Final Frontier,” where “god” was merely a clever alien with advanced technological powers. A skeptical mind will always believe in a “rational explanation” for every happenstance. I don’t much believe that anyone who genuinely disavows the possibility of the miraculous, will suddenly believe in God just because he shows up and does a few tricks, like healing an amputee or raising someone from the dead. (Someone already tried that once, and not a whole lot of people were all that impressed by it.)
“Proving God” is not within the means of an intellectual exercise, unfortunately. I can point to reason and science to an extent and find enough evidence to my satisfaction, so I have more to go on besides blind faith. Beyond that, our knowledge and scope of reason only go so far. They say God is only for the weak and simple-minded, the only ones dumb enough to believe in God in an age of reason ruled by science. Perhaps they are right. No one’s ever accused me of being all that bright. And I’m perfectly okay with that.