What About Origins? (CreationPoints)

by Dr A J Monty White

  What else does the Bible teach about God? One thing we learn as we read the Scriptures is that God has certain qualities that theologians refer to as ‘attributes’. Some of these are termed ‘incommunicable attributes’; they include God’s self-existence, his immutability, his infinity and his unity. These are part of what might be called the ‘constitutional nature’ of God. God’s other attributes are termed ‘communicable attributes’ and emphasize his personal nature. These include his spirituality, his intellectual attributes (the knowledge, wisdom and veracity of God), his moral attributes (the goodness, holiness and righteousness of God), and his sovereignty.

  What has this got to do with our understanding of the universe? Not so very long ago, those who studied the so-called natural sciences attempted to relate their discoveries to God’s natural revelation. For example, the science and study of astronomy was seen to be the study of God’s handiwork (Ps. 19:1); natural history was seen to be the study of God’s creation and design; and the laws of science were seen to be God’s laws. Indeed, scientists often dedicated their books and scientific theses to God, and some spoke of thinking God’s thoughts after him. It used to be believed (and still is by Christians) that the laws of science hold true and are unchanging because of what the Bible teaches about God and about his involvement with his creation: ‘The LORD our God, the LORD is one!’ (Deut. 6:4); ‘And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist’ (Col. 1:17); ‘Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever’ (Heb. 13:8).

  Because of who God is—the only one, true God—and because he is involved with his creation not only in the present but also in the past and future, it follows that we should expect a unity in the natural order and in the universe—in the past, present and future. It follows that the scientists’ belief in the unchanging laws of nature is not because a brief 500 years of scientific measurement have shown that there is stability, but because these laws reflect God, who is unvarying and unwavering. Scientists may not be aware of this and may even reject it—but nevertheless it is so. The universality of the laws of science determines that the laws of science that are in operation today were in operation yesterday and that they will be in operation tomorrow (that is the time element); and that these same laws are in operation throughout the entire universe (that is the dimensional element). If we remove belief in the one eternal God who is the Creator and Sustainer of the entire universe, we have the possibility of quite different laws operating at different times and in different places in the universe. But observations that we have made in the past, not only on earth but also in other parts of the universe, actually confirm the universality of the laws of science.

  It is obvious from the Bible that to create everything, God used different laws from the natural laws with which he now sustains the universe. This actually means that all attempts to discover or date the origin of the universe, of life and of people are outside the scope of scientific method. The laws that God used to create the universe, life and people are not the same as the natural laws that are now in operation. The founders of scientific method were aware of this and laid down that primary causes (how the universe and everything in it came into being) must be separated from secondary causes (how the universe works now). Scientific method is about secondary causes—we are in no position to observe and study primary causes. This explains why we have to rely on the Bible for the explanation of origins; the laws by which God created are entirely outside the realm of scientific method. This also explains why, when origins are examined scientifically, scientific method cannot be applied, because we are studying primary causes. Additionally, this explains why any conclusions that we reach appear to be anti-evolution and actually conclude nothing about creation as such. It is not really possible to apply scientific method to the study of origins, because, when we do so, we find that it can only be applied to secondary causes, and we end up concluding that evolution is unscientific and cannot be a secondary cause—that is, evolution cannot be an explanation for how God sustains life on earth and causes it to develop the way it has.

  The universe was created by a God of reason. We find reason from beginning to end in the Bible. Throughout the Bible, God argues rationally with humans: he tells us what we should and should not do, and why we should and should not do it. He also teaches cause and effect in human and divine relationships. Belief in a rational universe is part and parcel of scientific method, because the scientists who developed scientific method believed that the Bible was the book of God’s words, and they believed that God’s works (that is, the natural world which they believed was God’s creation) should be examined with the same reverence with which they studied God’s Word. They found reason in the Bible and believed that they would find reason in the natural world. And they did! They were therefore able to build up rational systems (for example, laws) on the basis of a uniform and orderly creation. They did not try to impose their systems on the natural world, as ancient philosophers had done; instead they learnt through the experimental method the way in which one part of nature relates to another.

  The Goldilocks effect

  I am sure that you are familiar with the story of Goldilocks and the three bears. Remember how Goldilocks found that the baby bear’s porridge, chair and bed were just right? Well, one thing that baffles the natural-thinking scientist and yet makes a lot of sense to the Christian is the fact that the universe appears to be just right for the existence of people. This is now called the ‘Goldilocks effect’.

  For example, Robert Matthews, Visiting Reader at the Department of Information Engineering at the University of Aston, asked, ‘Why, for instance, is our Universe and its laws just right for the existence of life? Some argue that it is because it was specially made for us by a benevolent creator.’24 It would appear that scientists are perplexed by a string of what they consider to be apparent accidents or coincidences that seem just too improbable to dismiss. Many of the familiar structures of the physical world—atoms, molecules in living systems, stars, galaxies—are remarkably sensitive to the precise value of the physical constants and the form of the fundamental laws of physics. It has been found that the slightest shift in the values of the parameters that are found in nature would bring about a drastic and catastrophic change in the orderliness of the cosmos. It seems as though the numbers that we find in the natural world are finely tuned to make the whole cosmos work properly—just as you would expect if you believed that the cosmos was created by a Creator.

  Consider, for example, the structure of the atomic nucleus, where the protons and neutrons are bound tightly together by a strong nuclear force. A small percentage decrease in the strength of this force would have a catastrophic result on the entire universe. Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen that has one proton and one neutron in its nucleus—hydrogen has just one proton. If there was a reduction in the strength of the strong nuclear force, then the proton and neutron in the nucleus of the deuterium atom would become unstuck and so the sun (and all the other stars, for that matter) would not be able to burn, because deuterium is an important element in its fuel chain. A small percentage increase in the nuclear force would have a worse catastrophic effect, for it would be possible for two protons to stick together, which would mean that the universe would be denuded of free protons, with the result that there would be little or no hydrogen in the universe. If there was no hydrogen, there would be no water. Also, if there was no hydrogen, there would be no life on the earth, for the chemicals that are found in living systems contain hydrogen. Furthermore, if there was no hydrogen, there would be no sun or stars, because hydrogen is the basic fuel that causes them to burn. God in his wisdom, however, created the universe with all the parameters finely balanced so that the earth would be a suitable place for us to inhabit. No wonder that, when God saw all that he had created, he pronounced it to be ‘very good’ (Gen. 1:31).

  There is more to be said about the Goldilocks effect. The earth’s distance from the sun is just right for us to l
ive comfortably. If the earth was just a few million miles further away from the sun, the earth would be in a permanent deep freeze, with no life existing on it. If, on the other hand, it was a few million miles nearer to the sun, all life on the earth would fry to death. The earth is in the Goldilocks zone, where it is just right for all life forms to live comfortably. The fact that we have such a large moon orbiting our earth also sustains life on the earth. If we did not have the moon, we would not have tides; and if we did not have tides, the seas and the oceans would stagnate, leaving them unable to sustain life. The size of the moon also helps sustain life on earth, as pointed out in an article in a New Scientist Special on the solar system:

  Such a big moon is a big boon for life. As Earth spins on its axis, it has a natural tendency to wobble, owing to that varying pull on it from other bodies such as the Sun. The unseen hand of the moon’s gravity gently damps that wobble, preventing rotational instability which would otherwise have caused dramatic changes in Earth’s climatic zones over time.25

  Finally, the position of the solar system in the Milky Way galaxy is also in the Goldilocks zone because its location is out of the way of the galaxy’s dangerous spiral arms, which are composed of millions of stars, and therefore is not exposed to disruptive gravitational forces or too much radiation. When God created everything, he not only put the earth in the Goldilocks zone (the habitable zone of the solar system), he also put the solar system in the Goldilocks zone of the Milky Way. He did this in order for life to be able to exist on this planet, as is confirmed in the Scriptures: ‘For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else’ (Isa. 45:18, KJV).

  Although the Bible does not mention the Goldilocks effect, it does confirm that the purpose of the universe and of the earth is to sustain life.

  Conclusion

  In this chapter, our journey into space has confirmed two things. The first is that Haldane’s famous statement is true: the universe is indeed stranger than we suppose. The second is that, when we look at the size of the universe and the great number and variety of stars that we find in it, we are able to declare with the psalmist, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God’ (Ps. 19:1).

  We have looked carefully at the widely accepted view concerning the origin of the universe—the Big Bang—and have seen that this hypothesis is not scientific and is riddled with problems. We have seen that the idea of multiverses is not based on scientific endeavour but is the figment of the imagination of those astronomers who propose it. We have also seen that the universe is understandable, and that this is because we humans are made in the image and likeness of the God who has created us. Finally, we saw that we have to thank God for putting us in the Goldilocks zone, not only in the solar system, but also in the Milky Way galaxy. If we were not in this habitable zone in both the solar system and the Milky Way galaxy, life on earth would not exist.

  A whole section in this chapter was devoted to the origin of the universe. But what about its future? What, if anything, do we know about that? Evolutionary scientists believe that one day the universe will experience what they call a ‘heat death’, although in reality it should be called a ‘cold death’, for they consider that the temperature of the universe will be just a fraction of a degree above absolute zero. This will happen, so they believe, when all the energy that is available to do work will have been used up, and nothing will happen any more—the universe will just ‘be’. The time period for when the universe will supposedly reach this state is almost unimaginable. It is thought that it will take about one trillion years for all the stars to use up all their fuel and fizzle out. By then, of course, there will be no life left in the universe; every single life form, including humans, will have become extinct billions of years previously. There will still, however, be occasional flashes of starlight in the dark universe, as very large stars collapse in on themselves to form black holes. For the next 10122 (the figure 1 followed by 122 zeros!) years, this ‘Hawking Radiation’ will be the only thing happening in the universe. Then, when all the black holes have evaporated, there will be darkness for 1026 years, during which time the universe will simply ‘be’ and nothing will happen.

  This depressing view of the future is in complete contrast with what the Bible teaches. Scripture says that, in contrast to this cold death, the entire universe will be consumed by a real heat death: ‘But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up’ (2 Peter 3:10).

  The universe will not last for eons, slowly running down. The Bible teaches that one day (and we must remember that no one, only God the Father, knows when that day will be—Matt. 24:36) the Lord will return and the universe, including the earth, will then suffer a catastrophic heat death which will annihilate the present cosmos. God will then create a new heavens and a new earth as described by the apostle John in Revelation 21. We should not view this future event light-heartedly or matter-of-factly, for the apostle Peter uses these events to warn us that we should live our lives in ‘holy conduct and godliness’ (2 Peter 3:11). Although the apostle Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 2:9 that we really do not have any idea about how wonderful heaven will be, the apostle John had a vision of heaven, and he told us that there ‘God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away’ (Rev. 21:4).

  Notes

  1 Isaac Asimov, Science Digest, vol. 69 (April 1971), p. 69.

  2 D. E. Thomson, ‘The Majestic, Unfathomable Universe’, in Science News, 104/7–8 (August 1973), p. 112.

  3 J. B. S. Haldane, ‘Possible Worlds’, in Possible Worlds and Other Essays (London: Chatto & Windus, 1927), p. 286.

  4 I have deliberately used miles as a measure of distance. To convert miles into kilometres, multiply them by 1.67. A light year is 6 trillion miles, or 10 trillion kilometres. Furthermore, I have used the scientifically accepted nomenclature for million, billion, trillion, and so on—that is, 106 is a million; 109 is a billion; 1012 is a trillion; 1015 is a quadrillion; 1018 is a quintillion; 1021 is a sextillion; 1024 is a septillion; and so on.

  5 Betelgeuse is the red star that is found in the top left-hand corner of the constellation Orion, which is visible in the winter months in the Northern Hemisphere.

  6 ‘Astronomers Find Evidence for Tens of Thousands of Black Holes’, 11 January 2005, at: sciencedaily.com.

  7 Heather Couper and Nigel Henbest, Big Bang (New York: DK Publishing, 1997), p. 8.

  8 David Darling, ‘On Creating Something From Nothing’, in New Scientist, vol. 151 (14 September 1996), p. 46.

  9 Quoted by Marcus Chown in The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead (London: Faber & Faber, 2007), pp. 162–163.

  10 Ibid.p. 162.

  11 Cited in Chown, The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead, pp. 56–58.

  12 Peter Coles, Cosmology: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 44.

  13 Quantum theory suggests that energy exists in discrete units called ‘quanta’.

  14 E. Learner et al., ‘An Open Letter to the Scientific Community’, in New Scientist, vol. 182 (22 May 2004), p. 20; at: cosmologystatement.org.

  15 A. A. Penzias and R. W. Wilson, Astrophysical Journal, vol. 142 (1965), p. 419.

  16 Sir Arthur Eddington, The Internal Constitution of the Stars (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1926).

  17 Karen Fox, The Big Bang Theory: What It Is, Where It Came From, and Why It Works (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2002), p. 134.

  18 Taken from Jason Lisle, ‘Does the Big Bang Fit with the Bible?’, in Ken Ham, (ed.), The New Answers Book 2 (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008), pp. 55–62.

  19 Quoted by Dennis Overbye in
‘A New View of Our Universe: Only One of Many’, 29 October 2002, at: nytimes.com.

  20 Marcus Chown, The Never-Ending Days of Being Dead (London: Faber & Faber, 2007), p. 3.

  21 Ibid.

  22 One of the truly great science-fiction short stories about a man transferring to a parallel universe is John Wyndham’s ‘Random Quest’, included in his collection of short stories entitled Consider Her Ways and Others (London: Penguin, 1965).

  23 Quoted by Marcus Chown, ‘Was the Universe Created by Angels?’, 5 June 2007, at: popularscience.co.uk.

  24 Robert Matthews, ‘The Cosmos Next Door’, in BBC Focus Magazine (December 2003), p. 63.

  25 Marcus Chown, ‘Why are the Sun and Moon the Same Size in the Sky?’, in New Scientist Unknown Solar System Special (31 January 2009), p. 28.

  Chapter 7

  The origin of life

  The formation of living organisms from non-living substances is called ‘abiogenesis’. The expression that is used to describe the supposed evolution of living organisms from non-life chemicals is ‘chemical evolution’. Strictly speaking, however, chemical evolution is the term that is used to describe the chemical events that supposedly took place on the hypothetical pre-biotic earth that finally led to the appearance of the first living cell. According to chemical evolutionists (those who study these processes), the evolution of non-life into life took place over a period of about one billion years, some 4,500 to 3,500 million years ago.