Greetings everyone! I would
like to open this blog with an anecdote from my time at First Baptist Church
Maryville. I have been blessed enough to have spent the last year as a member
of the Christmas and Worship Choir. Around the time of our wonderful Christmas
production members of the choir could be seen at all hours of the day wandering
throughout the church either preparing for the next performance or whiling away
the hours in fellowship. And so the stage was set. There in the midst of the
women’s dressing room were two friends, Hannah and Nicole, laughing and joking.
Nicole slipped in a science reference; Hannah made a Sheldon joke. Then, Nicole
unwittingly and excitedly exclaimed, “I LOVE THE BIG BANG THEORY!”
SCREECHHHH………..(silence…..awkward
stares). Activity resumes.
Yep, that was me. It was
fairly embarrassing. Just to clarify, I was totally talking about the
television show. I am not a supporter of the scientific Big Bang Theory but I
do feel a certain parallel to the cast of this show as I frequently find myself
at a table full of physicists and engineers. I tell this story because 1) I
thought it was a classic scene of awkwardness and 2) this class is going to be
addressing these very issues of science. In church. At length. And it is going
to bring us closer to God.
I am a recent 2012 graduate
of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville with a B.S. in Biological
Sciences/Biomedical concentration and minors in Chemistry and Music. I have
played geneticist with topminnows (ask me about my senior project, “Effects of
reproductive isolation and assortative mating on two species of closely related
species of topminnows, Fundulus notatus and
Fundulus olivaceus”….it’s fascinating
I promise), fed cell cultures to study chemotherapeutic methods, and ran spider
races to study the running patterns. To say I have been immersed in science for
the last four years is an understatement. At some point I realized I was doing
way more studying for my science classes and I had pushed my Bible study to the
side. Literally. Like I had to move a couple stacks of notes and textbooks to find
the Bible laying on my desk. That was something I was definitely NOT alright
with having to admit to myself. At about the same time I was deciding to enter
a doctoral program and struggling through an evolution class titled “Darwinian
Medicine” where I had class periods denying creation and a textbook that
blatantly renounced Christianity. I needed a little less science and a lot more
God in my everyday life. Good thing I have great Christian friends to help me
through!
I met Hannah at the
Lewis and Clark Confluence Tower in the summer of 2010. When we weren’t showing
off the history of the confluence to crowds of visitors, we spent our time in
conversations of science, politics, and religion (ah, the simple things in
life). I found out about Hannah’s calling to the ministry and her time at bible
college. I’ve also got to watch her transition from a music student at SIUE
(yes, we walked the same hallway for at least a year without ever meeting) to a
music therapy student at Maryville University. Who else then would I ask to
help me unravel my confusion about evolution and religion? Thus, conversations
turned into ideas, ideas into a class, and here we are today brimming with
information and excited to talk about “Case for a Creator” along with some
other special science topics. I have seen how important it is to reach out to
students in high school and college as they are inundated with the evolutionary
mindset and help them sift through the information before they begin to give up
on the teachings of the Church. Hannah has chosen a career as a health
professional and I have chosen a career of scientific research and academics. I
will enter the cell biology doctoral program at UMKC in August to continue my
life in the scientific community. But before then, I know we are both excited
to examine the inner workings of the Universe with “Case for a Creator”. Hope
you enjoy!
Nicole
A very deceptive headline based on what's in the article, but pretty timely considering we just discussed this a wee bit yesterday. http://www.space.com/16281-big-bang-god-intervention-science.html
ReplyDeleteRest assured that we will discuss some issues of astronomy and cosmology in week 3. The Big Bang and other theories concerning the origin of the universe will be some of the central topics of this lesson. If this is something you are interested in, Chapters 5,6, and 7 should be right up your alley. Feel free to explore any supplemental materials and bring them up in our discussion. Thanks!
DeleteInfinite regress... The biggest thorn in the side of theology.
DeleteWhat created that which created that which created that which created that which created the Universe.... The regress runs on and on, in the face of the 'Uncaused First Cause' paradox...
The only way to resolve the paradox (which I, myself find very intellectually dissatisfying) is to say that the First Cause (i.e. God) is trancendent of space and time.
This to me raises the question of "well, what does God exist within? A parallel Universe? An infinite regress, where he can go back before he existed and create himself?
And then the aneurysms ensue as we with our small minds try to contemplate infinity and deity.
I do however, look forward to attending next week's session, despite the clear-cut case of misinformation casually thrown about in the last.
As always,
For Science;
Devin Michalski
The word "rational" was bandied about yesterday morning. Those who practice science, like I did for so long, are understandably proud of the rational nature of their discipline. As a chemist for 14 years I knew, from a rational foundation, that the chemicals would behave the same way each time. But is rational thought the highest, most well ordered type of inquiry?
ReplyDeleteBorn exactly 100 years before me, Max Weber wrote Sociology of Religion in which he speculates that our rational age may not have everything we need, nor will rationality proportion our lives in a manner best suited for the civil polity.
He concluded that a rational creature would use resources in a rational manner that would most benefit the owner/earner/consumer of those resources. What sense does it make to earn money to only give it away? Charity is not rational.
Faith, however, defines a set of civil parameters in which rational thought is understood to be secondary to corporate life. Only through faith and the "restraint of rational capitalism" could resources be reapportioned in a manner that allows charity to exist. So much for rational thought, huh?
It's not an easy read, but if you're going to try it start with The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism as the groundwork.
Bill Bryson's book can be found here. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0739302949
ReplyDeleteHe suggests that the statistical proportions found in our universe are so narrow that if left up to chance, there should be no universe. Not a Christian book but useful for this discussion. Funny, too.
Keith Baker
> Just to clarify, I was totally talking about the television show. I am not a supporter of the scientific Big Bang Theory
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that you do not support the Big Bang Theory. There are many, many proponents of this theory, religious and secular.
To not support this theory is rather a mockery of science, regarding its many observational evidences (see also Cosmic Microwave Background, Hubble's Red Shifts (Inflationary Universe), etc.)
The Vatican has even adopted this theory, and just added the idea that God was the one behind the smoking gun, so to speak.
William Lane Craig's retelling of the Kalam Cosmological Argument in fact relies on the premise that the Universe had a beginning. And that beginning was the Big Bang. There is little question about this. The only question you can possibly ask is causation.
Just a thought.
Devin,
ReplyDeletePerhaps I should have elaborated more on this statement, but the point of this post was to introduce the class so I kept it brief. I will be the first one to admit that the areas of astronomy and physics are not my strongest areas, so while it is not a subject I actively read I am trying to learn more. My issue with the Big Bang Theory is the timeline that comes with the point of origin. That is to say, creation would require the universe to have a beginning and the Big Bang Theory along with the evidences you listed supports this. However, I believe in a literal account of Genesis and the Big Bang Theory puts the creation of the Sun prior to the Earth which is not consistent with the timeline in Genesis. Not everyone believes in the literal account of Genesis. The Vatican does not believe in a literal account and therefore have stated that they are open to considering the Big Bang Theory as the most convincing model for explaining the origin of the universe. Obviously, they believe that God lies outside our Universe and would be the one directing this initial event. The Big Bang Theory of the scientific community would not be able to comment on any supernatural forces guiding this process and I cannot fault them for that seeing as it lies outside the limitations of the scientific method. I may be incorrect in assuming the timeline and the idea of a beginning to our Universe all fall under the Big Bang Theory. This may be an umbrella term that needs to be addressed next week as we start using this terminology. I will do my best to find a definitive answer as it would be of direct benefit to myself if the timeline is not included. It might be best to say (before I have my answer on the issue of the timeline) that I disagree with some aspects of the Big Bang Theory because of inconsistency with the literal account of Genesis and therefore do not consider myself a supporter of the ‘scientific’ Big Bang Theory.
You are correct in saying that one of the evidences for the Kalam argument is that there is an origin to the Universe (Premise 2) so that the universe may have a cause (Premise 3). The fact that science has shown evidence of the universe expanding, and thus being retraceable to a single point of origin, is a wonderful example of science acting to support the story of creation presented in the Bible. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on the concept of multiple universes and other theories that suggest that the universe is cycling in a continuous stage of expansion and collapse which could eliminate a singular point of origin. Thanks for your comment and I hope you join us on Sunday so that you can contribute your thoughts to the discussion on issues such as these.