"Jesus thus calls on people to live as he lives, in contradistinction to the agonistic, competitive form of life marked by conventional notions of honor and status typical of the larger Roman world. Behaviors that grow out of service in the kingdom of God take a different turn: Love your enemies. Do good to those who hate you. Extend hospitality to those who cannot reciprocate. Give without expectation for return. Such practices are possible only for those whose dispositions, whose convictions and commitments, have been reshaped by transformative encounter with the goodness of God." - Joel B. Green

Monday, December 9, 2013

Bang Bang!


            God created! Christians must ask the difficult questions that are essential for the understanding of existence. What is creation? How did anything come to exist? Who or what created matter? How do such implications have any bearing on me? The exploratory nature of such questions will ultimately lead the Christian desiring answers, but can such questions be answered? In this brief paper, I will argue that the big bang scientific theory is not only a viable option for the Christian, but also one that adds depth to theological studies, and is in line with a biblical worldview. I will accomplish this task by engaging with big bang cosmology, its implications, and limits. Moreover, I will attempt to clear up some scriptural misinterpretations that have plagued biblical studies, especially the creation account in Genesis, for centuries.
             When dealing with theology and science, one should not let either infringe on the other’s territory. In the past, especially before the scientific age, it has been presumed that the creation account in the Bible is to be affirmed to have happened over a course of six twenty-four periods, with the universe coming into existence at day one. In what way does this understanding become unharmonious with science? Scientists do not believe that the earth can be calculated in ways that young earth proponents, for example, calculate it—often through biblical literalism. Is a Christian to believe science over scripture? Surely, the two cannot be within the same sphere; one must be right and the other wrong. The question must be asked differently. Was the Genesis account ever to be the scientific backbone for its recipients, the Israelites? These texts were not scientific guides on the workings of how creation came to be or how it is sustained, which leads to the big bang as a viable option for Christianity; rather, the text is set in place to understand the more theological question of why the universe came to be and why it is sustained.[1] Faith and science then do not sit opposed to each other, but rather should be complementary to one another. Christians and the scientific community should feel no real urge to push back on one another, as they operate on separate levels. Geneticist Steve Jones states it best; “The conflict between science and religion resembles a fight between a tiger and a shark. Each will prevail on its own proper territory, but it will be hopelessly defeated by encroaching on the domain of the other.”[2]
            The big bang cosmological theory observes that the universe is expanding, and as it does this it becomes less dense. Therefore, reversing this process one can observe that the universe becomes denser until it arrives at infinite density—a singular point in which all mass existed. Georges Lemaître’s model, which came to be known as the big bang theory, suggested that the universe was not eternal in the past, but rather came into being within finite time. This original model then suggests a creatio ex nihilo. A number of objections have been raised against Lemaître’s model. Two major objections include the cyclical model (this suggests that the universe is eternally expanding and contracting)[3] and chaotic inflation model (this theory maintains an eternal spawn of universes).  These theories attempt to dismantle a theory of fine-tuning by showing that there was no beginning to the universe. Many of these theories have serious flaws, and have led scientists to question their validity. For example, the second law of thermodynamics maintains that the world has inclinations towards equilibrium. Apply this theory on the larger scale to the universe, and eventually a state of equilibrium is expected take place; the universe will continue to expand, and eventually burn up all its energy, and reach equilibrium. If in fact the universe is eternal then why has the universe not reached this point? How, if the universe did not begin, is there continued expansion and life? It is among reasons such as these that scientists like Stephen Hawking can conclude, “Almost everyone now believes that the universe, and time itself, had a beginning at the big bang.”[4] This scientific understanding fits well within a biblical worldview. Although with one major change, the Bible states that God is the first cause of creation. The ancient mindset of Genesis would have never questioned whether God, who put into function the out-of-order cosmos, actually created the materials within the cosmos. The Bible states that “In the beginning God created,” but what does that mean? Does it imply that matter was already there and God mixed and matched to make it combine into one ordered world? Did God at some point create the material world? What did the hearers understand the “beginning” to mean? Immediately the modern mind is drawn to a point in time in which material things start, but as Old Testament Scholar John Walton points out, “In Hebrew usage this adverb (רֵאשִׁית) typically introduces a period of time rather than a point in time.”  In other words, the “In the beginning…” is not a way to speak of a moment in time prior to the seven days, rather it is a way the author explained the seven day period. Often it has been noted that the beginning is when God started material activity, but if we conclude this we must account for the material waters[5] that pre-existed before the “beginning.” This account does not give a material account of God creating out of nothing. As the ancients saw, this conclusion should lead Christians to understand that God did create everything out of nothing, but when and how God did this is not a matter of theology, but science. At this juncture, the big bang Theory becomes a probable explanation.
            The Genesis one and two accounts are written to the Israelites, people from an ancient society, a culture that is much different from the current one. What does it mean that God “created?” It should be noted for clarity that the English definition for “create” is to “cause to come into being or existence.”[6] Would the Israelites have understood “existence” in the way? The ancient Israelites would not have understood the terms “creation” or “existence” in the same way a modern thinker does. An Israelite would have thought of something as existing by its function, not its material qualities. In other words, the Israelites did not count a thing to exist simply by its material nature; the material nature had no bearing on a things “existence,” only when a thing is put into a functioning order does it have “existence.” Old Testament scholar John Walton remarks that ANE creation stories “often observe that nothing material is actually made…instead everything is function oriented.”[7] The Genesis one and two accounts are not the “start” of creation ex nihilo, but rather it is the story of how the chaotic material world is given order. This view does not discredit God of creating the material world—all ancient people would have assumed God as the creator of such material objects. God then, at the big bang, could be said to have allowed the natural process of expansion while directing it in a purposeful manner—this is why the universe appears to function with some sense of order. This is how God brings the universe into “existence.”   In addition, an examination of the Old Testament usage of the word ברא, (create) Walton states, “No clear example occurs that demands a material perspective for the verb.”[8]
             Verse two of the Genesis one creation account reads that the universe was “formless and void.” These Hebrew words are תֹּהוּ (tōhû) and בֹּ֫הוּ (bōhû). Other occurrences in the Old Testament point to a usage not as something that is non-material, but rather non-productive or non-functional. For example, in First Samuel 12:21 the same Hebrew word for “formless” is used, “And do not turn aside after empty things that cannot profit or deliver, for they are empty (emphasis added).”[9] The words are not denoting the non-material; rather Samuel is rebuking and telling the Israelites to turn from sin and worship the productive God, not the “gods” who produce nothing. The language in Genesis, then, provides a clear biblical path for the approval of the big bang theory. In fact the big bang gives explanation for the material world prior to God putting it into a functioning chaos-free world. In addition, it seems that this ordered world gives explanation for a fine-tuned world and purposeful big bang—most clearly seen when Genesis one, and two, and the anthropic principle are coalesced.[10] Objections are raised as to the purposefulness of the big bang, and have been challenged by writers like Tanner Edis, who claim that such “fine tuning” is easily explained by multi-verses.[11] This theory explicates that our universe is one of many universes, possibly infinity of them. The fact that our universe is produced with ordered appearance is only a result to be expected. However, Edis’s claims cannot be proven by the nature of the theory itself, which assumes information cannot be transferred between these universes. Moreover, the nature and high complexity of the big bang theory provides further evidence that there is a God behind such a theory. Take for example, the expansion rate of the universe at the big bang, “If it were greater…the matter in the universe would have become too diffuse for gravity to gather it into stars and galaxies. If it were less…gravity would have overwhelmed the expansion and pulled all the matter back into a black hole.”[12] It appears that science, and the big bang theory, can support a conclusion of divinity, so why so much fuss? Political and interpretative disputes overwhelm what should be a fruitful conversation between religion and science.
            The majority of battles are waged over religious interpretive preference, and politics. Literalism, and political agenda overrides proper biblical exegesis. As Edis notes, “Debates over evolution, then are rarely purely intellectual affairs. They involve politics, struggles between conservative and liberal religiosity.”[13] Christian literalists have tried to explain away the many difficulties of the Genesis one account, on material terms—again this misses the point of Genesis one. The Genesis story is giving the reader an account of God taking, that which was chaotic and out of order, and bringing it into order to function! As theologian Alister Mcgrath states, “Creation is a imposition of order on a formless chaos.”[14] God created a functioning cosmos for humanity. The Genesis account is giving the story of God’s great love, as creator, towards humanity and the universe. It is in this understanding that big bang cosmology does not stand against Christianity, but further gives scientific explanation to the how of creation—a question, which theology, simply, cannot supply an answer.





















Bibliography
Edis, Taner. Science and Nonbelief. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2006.
Giberson, Karl, and Francis S. Collins. The Language of Science and Faith : Straight Answers            to Genuine Questions. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2011.
Goldman, Jonathan L., and Andrew N. Sparks. Webster's New World Student's Dictionary.    New York: Macmillan USA, 1996.
Hawking, Stephen, and Roger Penrose. The Nature of Space and Time. Princeton, NJ:            Princeton University Press, 2010.
Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2001.
McGrath, Alister E. Theology: The Basics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
Walton, John H. The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate.            Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009.
Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987.



            [1] Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis. (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 10.
            [2] Webster, J. B., Kathryn Tanner, and Iain R. Torrance. (The Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), 74.
            [3] This is a re-popularized theory, which advocates such as Richard Dawkins explains how the universe expands, contracts, and then expands once more with different outcomes until the “right outcome” is achieved.
            [4] Hawking, Stephen, and Roger Penrose. The Nature of Space and Time. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010), 20.
            [5] Genesis 1:2.
            [6] Goldman, Jonathan L., and Andrew N. Sparks. Webster's New World Student's Dictionary. (New York: Macmillan USA, 1996), 202.
            [7] Walton, John H. The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), 33.
            [8] Ibid, 43.
            [9] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), 1 Samuel 12:21.
            [10]  Giberson, Karl, and Francis S. Collins. The Language of Science and Faith : Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2011), 178.
            [11] Edis, Taner. Science and Nonbelief. (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2006), 57.

            [12] Giberson, Karl, and Francis S. Collins. The Language of Science and Faith : Straight Answers to Genuine Questions. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2011), 185.
            [13] Edis, Taner. Science and Nonbelief. (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2006), 79.
            [14] McGrath, Alister E. Theology: The Basics. (Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012), 36.

No comments:

Post a Comment