חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם. דומה למיכי בוט.

Q&A: A Multiverse and Proofs for the Existence of God

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

A Multiverse and Proofs for the Existence of God

Question

Hello Rabbi. I am a yeshiva student who spends quite a bit of time on philosophy related to the existence of God. First of all, I want to thank you for all the wonderful content on the site. It truly is holy work, and there is almost nothing comparable out there.
I have several questions:
1. Does the theory of an infinite number of universes refute the physico-theological proof? If not, could you please explain? And if so, are we left only with the cosmological proof?
2. If so, why does everyone focus on the physico-theological proof and not the cosmological one? After all, if the physico-theological proof is not necessitated by reality because of the theory of infinite universes, then seemingly it would be better to focus on the cosmological proof, which cannot be refuted!
3. This is already a more personal question. I am a very, very rational person who acts according to the truth and only according to the truth. I understood that the rational conclusion is indeed to believe in God and live a religious life, but since these are not conclusive proofs (as you wrote in several places), I find it hard to go all the way with it. I mean, obviously I observe Sabbath, keep kosher, and pray three times a day, but it is hard for me, for example, to sit and learn Torah all day because of the small doubt that maybe, after all, it might not be true. It is clear to me that there is nothing in life that is 100 percent certain and no conclusive proof, but still it is specifically in this area of faith that I have difficulty. I would be happy if you could give me some advice on this matter.
Thanks in advance, and have a good rest of the week.

Answer

1. No. The question still remains: who created all these universes? And beyond that, what are the creatures that exist in all those universes? Maybe there are gods there? Demons and spirits? So in order to avoid the assumption that God exists, people generate countless universes in which there are countless different and bizarre creatures. Is that really a more reasonable and simpler solution?
3. That is a question for a psychologist. I have nothing to say about it. In my opinion, do what seems right to you and what fits your level of certainty. By the way, you do not have to sit and learn all day, even if you have complete certainty.

Discussion on Answer

Nativ Ben Admon (2025-09-02)

1. I did not understand. How does the argument from complexity survive under the theory of infinite universes? After all, the theory claims that there are very many universes in which nothing ordered happened, and in our universe somehow order came out. It is supposedly random. So how exactly is design still present here?
3. How do you yourself deal with this, for example? Do you get up in the morning and pray wholeheartedly?

Michi (2025-09-03)

1. Those universes are also ordered, just in a different way. All kinds of types. Someone has to create those universes. Beyond that, in each of them there are different and bizarre creatures, as I explained, so you gain nothing.
3. Yes. If by wholeheartedly you mean to fulfill my obligation. There is nothing in the world that I have certainty about. Soldiers give their lives for a goal that is not certain. So you have a problem praying in the morning?!

Cutting Down the Saplings (2025-09-03)

@Michi
> Soldiers give their lives for a goal that is not certain. So you have a problem praying in the morning?!
Hmm, yes? It is not for nothing that it is said, "be strong as a lion." I have to do this every morning, in heat and in cold, when I feel like it and when I do not. And when you do not believe that there is someone listening, all the supplications are even a depressing experience. And of course, from the standpoint of rational egoism, it would be preferable to shirk, except that this clashes with the principle of utilitarianism, and it seems there is no rational way to decide between them (what Sidgwick called the dualism of practical reason). I do not see that there is any utilitarian consideration in the case of prayer, so in the absence of certainty (at least beyond a reasonable doubt), why should a person sacrifice precious hours of sleep for a dubious experience?

השאר תגובה

Back to top button