The Bible and science on the origin of the universe - Is There a Conflict?
Every existing worldview attempts to give some
type of explanation of the origin of the universe. Many of these assertions are
metaphysical in nature, sometimes with a material sub-claim. In this article, I
will attempt to analyze the claim of the Biblical worldview on the origin of
universe and see if it has any conflict with the science of today.
The Biblical worldview makes a metaphysical
claim about the origin of the universe, plus a material sub-claim. The
metaphysical claim is that God created the universe in the beginning. The
material sub-claim is that the universe had a beginning.
Here is the breakdown:
Metaphysical claim: God created the universe
(all of time, space and matter) in the beginning (Genesis 1:1). Note that the
Hebrew language doesn't have a specific word for ‘universe.’ The phrase
'Heavens and the earth' is used here instead to indicate 'all physical
reality.' In Greek, the equivalent word is 'cosmos.' Sometimes other phrases in
Greek that mean ‘all things’ can also be used to refer to the universe.
Material sub-claim: The universe (all of time,
space and matter) had a beginning. In other words, the universe is not eternal;
it began to exist at some time in the finite past.
In the first verse of the Bible (Gen 1:1- “In
the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”), two things are made
clear:
1) God created the universe (metaphysical claim)
2) The universe had a beginning (material
sub-claim)
It is difficult to come up with any alternate
interpretations of this verse, as the claims are stated quite clearly and
objectively. It answers two important questions about the universe: Who created
it? God created it. Is it eternal? No, it had a beginning.
We will leave the metaphysical claim (God
created the universe) alone since science, by its very nature, can have no
bearing on that part. It is a self-evident truth that science cannot prove or
disprove metaphysical claims, as such claims do not deal with matter (which is
the realm of science).
But science can be used to defeat material
sub-components of metaphysical claims, if any exist. As we have seen above, for
the Biblical worldview, there exists a material sub-claim that the universe had
a beginning. This claim of the Bible doesn't give any information on how old the
universe is; it simply asserts that God created the universe in the beginning.
This (The Biblical claim) clearly indicates that the universe is not eternal,
but rather, it began to exist at some point of time in the finite past.
One of the most established scientific theories
in our time pertaining to the origin of the universe is known as the Standard
Model [of the Universe]. The popular name for this theory is the “Big Bang
Theory.” According to this theory, the universe is constantly expanding. So if
we go back in time, we can see that the universe (all of space, time, and
matter) had an absolute beginning approximately about 13.7 billion years ago
(by most calculations). This theory was proposed in the early 1900s, and after
generations of study and experimentation, it is one of the most established
scientific theories concerning the origin of the universe. Many of the
predictions and observations laid out by this theory have been proven to be
true/valid. In a nutshell, the Big Bang Theory states that the universe is not
eternal; rather, it had a beginning. It does not and cannot give any hint on
‘who’ or ‘what’ could have created the universe; it simply shows that the
universe had an absolute beginning.
So as you can see, today's cosmology actually
confirms the material sub-claim of the Biblical worldview. Robert Jastrow, a
late NASA scientist, said, “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the
power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains
of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over
the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting
there for centuries.”
Claim of Biblical worldview: The universe had a
beginning.
Claim of today’s science: The universe had a
beginning.
As you can see, there is no conflict between the
Biblical worldview and science when it comes to the nature of the origin of the
universe.
If there is any worldview or system of beliefs
that has a material claim saying that the universe is eternal, it is safe to
assume that such a worldview cannot be held to be true, based on the current
scientific findings and knowledge. But for the Biblical worldview, it is a
great confirmation from science. What Moses, the author of the book of Genesis,
wrote approximately 3,500 years ago in Genesis 1:1 has now been confirmed by
modern science. Again, I am not talking about ‘God creating the universe,’ but
rather the claim that the ‘universe had a beginning.’
A few clarifications:
I am not arguing here that a worldview needs the
help of science to establish its truth. No, the claim of a worldview can stand
on its own. And it is not wrong for people to believe the claims of their
worldview on the basis of faith, as long as there is no clear “defeater” for
that belief that can be found in science or in our everyday observations. Once
the defeater to a claim is present and valid, then it is not a good idea to
adhere to such a claim, as it poses a clear contradiction between what we
believe in faith and what we know from science.
Also, I am not using modern science to try to
interpret the Bible. I am taking the claims of the Bible and that of science
independently and comparing them to study their compatibility or
incompatibility. This is a good, even vital exercise for all of us to do with
whatever worldviews we adhere to.
It is important to note that the Big Bang
Theory, as a scientific theory, does not and cannot say anything about what
happened before the beginning of the universe. Since there is no time, space
and matter before the point of singularity, science is unable to comment on
anything pertaining to that, as it can only deal with the material world, which
didn’t begin to exist until the beginning.
I found no flaws in your arguments, Benoy. Good job.
ReplyDelete