Origins of the Universe Essay Flashcards
Big Bang Theory (KU)
Before its occurrence there was no time, space or matter. Then 13.7 billion years ago, the universe came from nowhere in the form of a rapidly expanding singularity (hot, dense something). The cause of this singularity is still unknown. Stars were made when matter clumped together with hydrogen and helium fusing to create heavier elements. Our own star the sun was formed approximately 9 billion years ago. The planets then came into existence when supernovae catapulted matter together with gravity holding it in place. These planets would then circle stars and create solar systems, also caused by gravity. Our own planet, the Earth was formed approximately 4.6 billion years ago.
Big Bang Theory (A) Expanding Universe
One piece of evidence supporting the BBT is the expanding universe. Light travels to the Earth from other galaxies. As the light comes closer, the distance between the Earth and the galaxy increases resulting in the wavelength of the light becoming longer. Longer wavelengths of visible light are red hence, this is called ‘red shift’. The red shift of the light allows scientists to calculate the speed and direction of travel therefore showing that our universe is expanding. If we are to assume our universe is expanding then there must’ve been a point where the universe started expanding. This supports the BBT.
Big Bang Theory (A) Elements in our Universe
More supporting evidence is the amount of elements in our universe. These elements could’ve been made in two ways, either the lighter elements like hydrogen, seconds into the BB and the heavier elements like iron created in the centre of stars much later in the timeline. Scientists, with the assumption that the Big Bang occurred predicted a specific amount of elements in our universe and were spot on with their prediction, therefore further backing up the BBT.
Big Bang Theory (A) Implications
The majority of scientists and non-religious people believe that it was the BB that caused the universe to come into existence and that it was a natural and random event. As a result, the majority of scientists and non-religious people don’t believe that a God played a part in the universe as it was a natural and random event.
Another implication is that they don’t believe that science and religion is something to be mixed together as the BBT shows that the universe could’ve been created on its own. Therefore, they would reject the Genesis account.
Big Bang Theory (E)
There is observable evidence that the BB did occur. With the appropriate equipment, the human eye can view this evidence. On the other hand faith isn’t based on such evidence or proof.
Also, science is something that is adaptable and changes as our understanding of our universe develops. Meanwhile, faith is rigid and tends to reject such progressions in our understanding of our world.
Literal Christian (KU)
Literal Christians believe the Genesis account best describes the origins of our universe. To describe, Genesis begins with ‘In the beginning’ Genesis 1:1. This tells Christians that the universe is finite and hasn’t always been around. They believe that God used commands to create our universe such as ‘Let there be’ Genesis 1:3. He believed that he was able to create all features including stars, planets and life in six yom (or days). YEC are a denomination of literal Christianity. They take the account literally and finally they believe that the universe is only 6000-10000 years old.
Literal Christian (A) Goldilocks principle
One reason that YEC believe this point of view is because of the goldilocks principle. This is the argument that our universe is simply too perfect to be the result of a random and natural event. They argue that our universe must’ve been the result of a more intelligent creator such as a God due to the low probability fo the big bang making such a zone.
Literal Christian (A) Creationist Science
Another reason that YEC believe the universe was created is because of creationist science. This includes using science to try and prove the universe was created. One such argument is their calculation that if the universe is as old as claimed in the BBT then there would be 70x more salt in the ocean. They also claim that they have evidence in the form of geological rock formations which suggest a global flood, just as mentioned in the bible through Noah’s Ark
Literal Christian (A) Implications
Ken Ham argues that the bible is literally true and that Genesis is a factually accurate account of how the universe was created. As a result they dismiss scientific views such as the BBT and believe them to be incompatible with one another as scientific views are not mentioned in the Genesis account.
Another result of this argument is that Non-Literal interpretations of Genesis are rejected as they pick and choose information instead of simply accepting the Genesis account.
Literal Christian (E) Evaluations
I would argue that the Literal Christian viewpoint as creation science is poor. They start off with the assumption that the universe was created and pick and choose evidence which suits their agenda. Ken Ham is also a hypocrite as he criticises the scientific view for using imperfect humans capable of error when he does himself.
Secondly, if we are to assume the goldilocks principle that our universe was created by a greater and more intelligent being this doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a Christian god. It could’ve been the Flying Spaghetti Monster that created our universe for all we know.
Non-Literal Christian (KU)
Non-Literal Christians combine the two theories and argue that God used the Big Bang as a means of creating our universe. They see the Genesis account as being symbolic of the relationship between man and God and not the scientific answers to all the questions of our universe. High profile supporters of this view are the Pope and Anglican John Polkinghome, both argue that the bible answers why God created the universe and the BBT how God created it.
Non-Literal (A) Arguments
Non-Literals would argue that because of the age of the bible (2500 years old) some parts older that it is unreliable. Because many were illiterate, word of mouth was the communication used meaning details would’ve been lost and skewed over time before Genesis was written down.
Non-Literals would argue that their belief in the BBT is backed up by the scientific method which allows scientists to cross check each others work giving it even more validity and reliability. The amount of evidence backing up the BBT such as the red shift as faced persistent scrutiny yet has stood up to it.
Non-Literal (A) Implications
Non-Literals are able to combine the beliefs of modern science with the beliefs of Christianity.
An implication of this is that Non-Literals are much more adaptable and open-minded in their beliefs about the origins of the universe. Their beliefs reflect progress in our understanding.
Non-Literals believe that the universe was created through the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago by God. As a result they will clash with Literal Christians who instead claim that our universe is 6000-10000 years old and they reject non-genesis/bible theories so they would deny the BB ever happened.
Non-Literal (E) Evaluations
I disagree with the Non-Literal View as just because there is a gap in the BBT in how the singularity began doesn’t necessarily mean that a God was behind it. It is possible that we just haven’t found it out yet.
I would also argue that Non-Literal Christians can’t really just pick and choose what to believe in the bible. You simply accept it or not. If some parts of the bible are untrue then maybe all of it is? Or if some parts are correct why can’t everything be. In conclusion they just and choose whatever suits their agenda.
