Origin of the Universe

Origin of the Universe By Ron Choong Q1 Question of Origins Library Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 1 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe ACT is an educational non-profit organization based in New York City. Our goal is to engage the urgent issues of our times and persistent questions of all ages. We encourage interdisciplinary engagement with every field of human inquiry to better understand the impact of history, philosophy, culture and the natural sciences on the Christian faith. We seek to articulate an enriched worldview with integrity and foster a climate of inquiry within a sanctuary of doubt we call a theological safe-space (TSS). We hold the Bible to be our primary source of authority for a responsible witness in the marketplace of ideas. In our quest to build an apologetic for the missional church, we begin with a discipleship of the mind. Thus, our minds matter and thinking things through is fundamental to worshipping God. With the guidance of the Spirit, we seek to disciple the Christian mind. Vision: To Think Things Through Mission: By providing a theological safe space: 1. To disciple and renew the mind; 2. To interact with every cultural sphere of influence and human inquiry; 3. To equip the Church for growth and effective witness. Principal Instructor: The Rev. Mr. Ron Choong Ron Choong, an ordained Presbyterian minister, founded ACT in Dec. 2003. He read law, the natural sciences, international relations, the humanities and theology in Great Britain and the United States. His academic training includes BA (Open, UK), LLB Hons. (London), STM (Yale) MDiv, ThM & PhD (Princeton Seminary). Ron has served as an apologist/evangelist in New York since 1991 and conducts an international summer preaching and teaching ministry. His current research interests include the emergence of moral cognition in human intelligence & the implications of consciousness, emotions, and memory, for the moral demands of the doctrine of the imago Dei. Q1.Origin of the Universe.2009 © Ron Choong. All Rights Reserved. All rights reserved under Pan American and International Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. ___________________________________________ Published in the United States by Academy for Christian Thought Publications ACT Post Office Box 3230 Church Street Station New York, New York 10008 www.actministry.org I am very thankful for Ron’s double commitment to international students and to the development of the Christian mind. He is a gifted and dedicated young man and we at All Souls Church in London are glad to support his ministry. Dr. John R. W. Stott Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 2 Ministries 1. Kairos Seminars: A ‘seminary-without-walls’ program of in-depth investigations to explain the relevance of Christian doctrines to cultural spheres of influence and inquiry. 2. Project Timothy: An exegetical and interdisciplinary study in the art and science of responsible biblical interpretation. 3. Paideia Bible Studies: A study program for international scholars from around the world to examine aspects of the Christian faith. 4. Science & Theology Symposia: Citywide symposia to encourage science and theology dialogues in the marketplace of ideas. 5. International Ministry: This teaching and preaching ministry extends our reach beyond the United States. What We Do? 1. We address the challenges posed by the sciences and religious pluralism: (1) the role of the sciences to make sense of reality (theological reflection and scientific discovery share a common source in divine disclosure) and (2) its relationship to other religions. 2. We promote interdisciplinary research for a transformative renewal of the mind, to make the message of the Bible relevant to the urgent questions of the day. We consider how the sciences, history, the arts, philosophy and ethics (SHAPE) have influenced our interpretation of the biblical texts as we engage the world of commerce, academia, media, politics and sports (CAMPS) and formulate a worldview by thinking things through, theologically. 3. We develop globally relevant and conceptually holistic discipleship programs. In the sciences, we inquire into methodologies to distinguish science from scientism and evolution from evolutionism. In history, we teach global, rather than Eurocentric Christianity. In the arts, we teach their origins, redemptive power, and nexus to worship. In philosophy, we scrutinize the justification for atheism and agnosticism. In ethics, consider the divine moral command and its implications. In biblical theology, we teach a method of interpretation that engages other religious convictions and scientific inferences while remaining faithful to the confessional integrity of the Bible as a trustworthy, divinely inspired writing of fallible, human effort. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 3 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe CONTENTS Theme: The Question of Origins Executive Summary Introduction to Interdisciplinarity in Science & Theology 1. Definitions 1.1 Nature 1.2 Origin 1.3 Creation 1.4 Causation 1.5 Universe 1.6 Contingency 1.7 Summary 2. Scientific Inference on COSMOGONY 2.1 Methodology in the Natural Sciences 2.2 A Brief History of Cosmogony 2.3 Classical Physics & the Big Bang Model 2.4 Quantum Physics & the Hawking-Hartle Hypothesis 2.5 Quantum Solutions to Classical Cosmogonic Paradoxes? 2.6 Summary 3. Philosophical Speculation on CAUSATION 3.1 The Philosophical Quest for Ultimate Causation 3.2 Personal Explanation: Richard Swinburne 3.3 Kalam Argument: The Universe is not Eternal 3.4 God and Time 3.5 Complexity & Emergence 3.6 Summary 4. Theological Reflection on CREATION 4.1 Trinitarian Monotheism 4.2 Biblical Texts On Creation 4.3 History of the Doctrine of Creation 4.4 Kairic Time & Chronic Time 4.5 Creatio Ex Nihilo & Creatio Continua 4.6 Summary 5. Conclusion Selected Bibliography Appendices: A: Control Beliefs, B: The Early History of Quantum Mechanics, C: A History of the Big Bang Model, D: Towards a Theological Doctrine of Nature, E: The Apostles’ Creed, F: Selected Glossary Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 4 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe Theme: The Question Of Origins Series Why should Christians care about the question of origins? How does it relate to Christian belief? Q1 Cosmogony: Origin Of The Universe Scientific investigation is premised on methodological naturalism and serves as a powerful tool to infer what happened in the past. Investigating any singular historical event demands a logical rather than a statistical inquiry and unverifiable assumptions are unavoidable. With classical and quantum physics, scientists probe the origin of the universe. Available scientific models are shaped by philosophical commitments and inevitably tread on theology. The Christian doctrine of creation includes the natural world (universe) and the non-natural realm (supernatural refers only to God). Can inferences from the sciences be reconciled with a theological explanation of a creatio originalis ex nihilo, which undergoes creatio continua, and anticipates a final creatio nova? This is the subject of our inquiry in Q1 - Whether the sciences or the philosophy of cosmogony render the Christian doctrine of divine creation an incoherent belief? Q2 Biogenesis: Origin Of Life When Charles Darwin published his theory of evolution in The Origin of Species in 1859, he deliberately left out how life came about. Today, this remains a mystery in science, forcing the collaboration of many disciplines. While life may be described in terms of its constituents, this cannot explain the cause that makes a pile of organic stuff sense, react, reproduce, and die. The Christian doctrine of creation teaches that reproductive matter emerged from an intentional (teleological) exercise of divine will. Life is not accidental and its purpose has been declared. The origin of life lies in a creatio continua that anticipates a final creatio nova. This is the subject of our inquiry in Q2 Whether the sciences or the philosophy of biogenesis render the Christian doctrine of divine creation an incoherent belief? Q3 Anthropogenesis: Origin Of Humans Are Homo sapiens sapiens unique in the living1 world? The similitude of our DNA with other life forms fails to explain our unique ability, e.g., grammatical speech. The ‘symbolic species’ is able to pass on information through time (by writing), possess insight (to guess how things work), and contemplate the future (with imagination). The Christian doctrine of creation describes us as made in the image of God (imago Dei). This does not rest merely in our capacities or physiology, but in our relationality with God. Although we share a biological continuity with the rest of nature, the origin of our humanity calls us into fellowship with our creator as ‘the praying animal’. We are selfreflective, morally conscious beings who worship and live in expectation of the creatio nova. This is the subject of our inquiry in Q3 - Whether the sciences or the philosophy of anthropogenesis render the Christian doctrine of divine creation an incoherent belief? Q4 Conscientiogenesis: Origin of Consciousness Consciousness derives from Latin conscientia which primarily means moral conscience. In the literal sense, conscientia (or con scientia) means knowledge-with, that is, shared knowledge. In juridic texts by writers such as Cicero, conscientia is the knowledge that a witness has of the deed of someone else. In Christian theology, conscience stands for the moral conscience that is only fully known to God. Today, the quest for the origin of consciousness is perhaps the greatest trophy in philosophy and science. While the latest non-theological interdisciplinary probes in consciousness studies now consider its metaphysical reality in TXCM (The Extended Conscious Mind) theories, contemporary theology has introduced a physicalist non-metaphysical account of the conscious self or soul. Buddhist and Hindu research into the nature of consciousness add to these inquiries. What are we to make of these trends of thought, and what are the implications for our understanding of the Bible with regard to our postmortem existence? This is the subject of our inquiry in Q4 - Whether the sciences or the philosophy of conscientiogenesis render the Christian doctrine of divine creation an incoherent belief? 1 The Linnean classification gave us an artificial dichotomy of life with the plant and animal kingdoms. In 1937, a new classification system divided life into two domains, prokaryotes and eukaryotes. There were four eukaryote kingdoms (plants, animals, fungi, and protists). Prokaryotes are single celled nuclei-free life forms. Advances in molecular sequencing techniques by Carl Woese in the late 1970s divided terrestrial life into three domains, archaea, bacteria, & eukaryota. None of these include viruses because we cannot agree on whether they constitute ‘life forms’. All of these, viruses included, arise from a universal common ancestor (or UCA) that is not even the first life form (FLF). The FLF may have become extinct before the current life forms evolved. See Paul Davies’ The Fifth Miracle, 54. For information about archaea research, check out http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/archaea/archaea.html. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 5 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe (This preview is only a selection of the pages) 1. Definitions 1.4 Causation 1.4.1 Is origination created or is creation originated? While origin is a physico-temporal term that refers to the temporal priority of a chronological sequence, creation is a theological-atemporal term that refers the atemporal emergence of non-divine existence. We may say that creation involves a temporal origination. Thus the creation of the universe is therefore more than and inclusive of the origin of the universe but not vice-versa. Hence discovering the origin of the universe does not satisfy the quest for understanding the creation of the universe. 1.4.2 Was the universe created or did it originate? While science is agnostic on the matter of creation, it is a fundamental Christian belief that the origin of the universe rests with its creation. The origin of the universe is posterior to the act of creation. In this case, the universe constitutes nature but is a subset of and does not comprise creation. Non-Christians may believe that the origin of the universe does not rest with creation but they are left with a final solution without an answer. The universe would have just emerged, which is a non-answer or at least, not much of one. Christianity presumes that there is existence prior to creation; something with no beginning began to create.2 Of course, one may assert that creation itself is an event with a beginning, implying that there is nothing prior to creation, hence the origin of the universe is the beginning of existence; nothing precedes it, not even God. However, such a presumption is a theological and even a philosophical claim, and does not constitute a scientific statement. 1.5 Universe There are at least three definitions of the term universe: (a) the observable universe, (b) the universe as a whole, (c) the universe that consists of all that exist. The first is directly and inferentially measureable by the science of cosmology, the second requires physical speculation to model after and third is open only to the comprehensive reflection that theology provides. So the two fields of inquiry seek to describe, explain and predict the future of the universe such that cosmogony investigates (b) the universe as a whole (both observable and unobservable but natural) while theology concerns (c) the universe that consists of all that exist. 2 It gets even more complicated. Some theologians argue that God did not begin to create but has eternally been creating since it is part of God’s character to create. This is an undesirable imposition since this permits a view that creation is as eternal as God. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 6 1.7 Summary Nature refers to all material entities extended in space and time, and perceptible to human observation either directly or by inference. Origin refers to a beginning in a physical and importantly, measurable reality, from preexisting energy-matter. Creation refers to an emergence of physical and metaphysical existence, from nothing. It requires an intentional will of the creator. Thus, while the sciences consider the origin of the universe as the emergence of measurable reality, Christian theology describes divine creation to include the emergence of the universe as the origination of measurable energy-matter as well as the emergence of non-measurable immateriality such as spirits and other heavenly beings. Divine creation is therefore not synonymous with, but includes scientific cosmogony. As for the notion of causation, theology is concerned with the ultimate rather than with derivative cause, because the doctrine of creation asserts the contingency of the universe. Even the notion of universe may be distinguished by the limitation that measurability imposes on the scientific quest. Ultimately, the issue before us is the contingency of the universe. If either science or philosophy can demonstrate that the universe is not contingent, theology will not be convergent with these other fields of human inquiry. In the next three chapters, we shall consider how the natural sciences infer, how philosophy speculates, and how theology reflects on these questions. Chapter 2 will assess scientific grounds to deny the doctrine of creation. Chapter 3 will discuss the philosophical coherence of the Christian belief that the universe is not eternal and was created by a cause that is not a part of the universe. Chapter 4 will advance the theological claim that creatio ex nihilo does not mean that creation has stopped. What we call providence is in fact the continuing work of divine creatio originalis. The Christian theological doctrine of creation is the best possible explanation for the ‘origin’ of the universe as a divinely contingent creation, since neither philosophy nor the natural sciences are competent to come up with an answer and neither can deny the doctrine. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 7 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe (This preview is only a selection of the pages) 2. Scientific Inference For Physical Existence 2.2 A Brief History of Cosmogony It all began when Albert Einstein’s assumption that the universe is static was questioned. In the 1920s, the Belgian mathematician-priest George Lemaitre and Russian astronomer Aleksandr, working independently, came up with the suggestion that the universe is expanding. Towards the end of the decade, American astronomers Edwin Hubble and Milton Humason documented evidence to affirm this suspicion at Mount Wilson Observatory in California. From painstaking examination of photographic studies of the night sky, they detected that light emitted from galaxies was shifted towards the red end of the spectrum. This Red Shift was the cosmic version of the Doppler Effect. It signals the movement of the galaxies away from the observer on earth as well as from each other at high speed. This stunning discovery implies that our present universe was once smaller and was at one time – a singularity at its origin, with infinite density and no volume at all. This model of the universe came to be known as the Big Bang Model (BBM). This excited many Christians, who thought that the BBM was the precise scientific proof that the Bible is scientifically correct. The atheist philosopher Quentin Smith reminded us that at the cosmological singularity, the laws of physics do not apply and the unpredictable emissions will be incompatible with a provident God who intentionally created. In 1981, Pope John Paul II reminded Christians that science by itself cannot solve the problem of the universe’s beginning. Such knowledge can only come from God’s revelation. Christian theology was saved from the danger of attaching itself to the provisional findings of the sciences. 2.5 Quantum Solutions To Classical Cosmogonic Paradoxes 2.5.1 The Paradox of the First Cause Paradox: A major assumption in physics is that there is no effect in time without a cause. We can never know the beginning because even a beginning cause is required to have its own cause, making it somewhat not very much of a beginning cause. Quantum Solution: In the quantum model of probabilism, there is no specific cause of any event.3 Comment: This ‘solution’ merely shifts the goal posts so that a solution can be found as long as it need not be specific! This I think evades the very spirit of the question in cosmogony. 3 Timothy Ferris, The Whole Shebang, 247. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 8 2.5.2 The Paradox of Something For/From Nothing4 Paradox: Origination suggests an emergence of something from an initial state before it was that something, when it was nothing. How can nothing5 become something? Quantum Solution: If the energy content of the universe is zero (every other measure of energy, both negative (such as gravity6) and positive (such as matter), amounts to zero value,) then something can come from nothing, provided nothing has a zero value that is the sum of positive and negative values. Comment: This silly sleight of hand violates the spirit of the question. Even negative energy is something and not nothing. It will not do just to solve mathematical equations and disregard the reality of the ontological existence of gravity. This makes the origin of the universe a zero-energy system derived from another zero-energy system. Further, since we cannot agree on the scientific meaning of ‘nothing,’ this solution is itself problematic. Physical origination never truly refers to absolute genesis since a prime presumption in physics is that matter always was, has been and will be. However, a reference to creation rather than origin is a different matter. This paradox in fact refers to creation rather than origin and while quantum physics may toy with it, a theological answer may be more satisfying. Can something be created out of nothing? Yes, if by nothing we mean a creaturely nothing. The Christian doctrine of kenotic creation describes a divine withdrawal from reality to create temporality (time) and extension (space). When God withdraws, it creates a cosmic vacuum from which cosmic reality may emerge and kairic time begets chronic time. In this way, God created something material from nothing material (although not ‘nothing immaterial’), creatio ex nihilo. 2.6 Summary Scientific inference concludes that the universe had a temporal beginning. Classical physics offers the Big Bang Model (BBM) as the best explanation for the origin of the universe but is plagued by many unsolved problems, especially the notion of singularity. Quantum physics offers a different reality from what we appear to experience and contradicts the BBM. Both classical and quantum physics offer no scientific ground to deny the Christian confession of the doctrine of creation. Further, since the Bible is not a scientific text, we do not expect a mechanistic explanation. The Bible does not anticipate the BBM and leads us to expect something like a BBM universe rather than a steadystate universe and this should not be lost on us.7 4 Otherwise known as the NFL (No Free Lunch) Paradox. Nothing may be (i) no thing, (ii) un-thing, or (iii) athing. Nothing may be mathematical, ontological, ontological, philosophical, or theological. 6 Some clever guy (actually, his name is Edward Tryon, a physicist from Columbia University in New York) suggested that since gravity is an attractive force, it should be given a negative rating in the cosmic ledger. 5 7 Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 18. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 9 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe (This preview is only a selection of the pages) 3. Philosophical Speculation On Causation 3.1 The Philosophical Quest for Ultimate Causation Ancient thinkers have usually assumed that everything is caused by something else. They assume that the universe did not spontaneously generate without account. So it stands to reason that whatever exists in the universe, indeed, all that exists in the universe, must have an ultimate cause. Philosophy can help us anticipate the necessary characteristics of the causal agent for the origin of the universe. Among the earliest attempts at understanding the universe was that of the presocratic Parmenides of Elea. He denies the reality of appearances altogether and argues that motion is illusory and therefore, the universe is solid throughout and immobile. This arose from his famous dictum, ‘Things which are not are not’. They mistakenly used a logical truth to establish a substantial conclusion. The predicate of the premise (the first ‘are not’) is a logical truth but the subject (the second ‘are not’) is a substantial conclusion. This led to the view that void or empty space cannot exist. Since any motion requires empty space for a thing to move into, that movement is logically and substantially impossible. This may have been the first recorded attempt to establish a cosmological system on the basis of rigorous logical arguments.8 Later cosmologies moved from pure speculation based on observation to the modern scientific approach of measurement, experimentation and testing hypotheses. Today, cosmogony, a subfield of cosmology, is studied alongside the philosophy of physics and even philosophical and scientific theology. We need philosophy to evaluate scientific and theological statements because (i) science does not seek explanations for so foundational an object as a causal agent, and (ii) theology is textually committed to causal agency of matter with dogmatically specified characteristics. In other words, most scientists are not paid to study the foundations of metaphysics and most theologians are committed to sacred texts. Subjecting both disciplines to the healthy probing of philosophical speculation imposes important checks on any weak, indefensible, or internally incoherent arguments. Some may object that what may seem incoherent in science may merely be epistemic rather than ontological ignorance, so that given sufficient time, science will provide the coherence.9 Others may similarly argue that judging theological statements undermine the sovereignty of divine revelation. We respond that good science is never afraid to maintain a tentative and provisional answer open to external peer scrutiny. We also claim that theology is not to be confused with dogma. It is a secondary science of articulating thoughtful, insightful, and perhaps even inspired reflections on the sacred texts. With regard to the universe, what can we philosophically expect from the cause of space and time? The following might be a partial list of attributes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8 Transcends space and time, i.e., beginningless, existing atemporally and non-spatially Changeless, since timelessness entails changelessness Immaterial, since changelessness implies immateriality Uncaused, lacking any antecedent causal conditions Supremely powerful, since it created the universe Personal, with the power to will freely Hare, Plato, 12-13. An example of this is the unsettled dispute between two of the several interpretations of quantum physics, Niels Bohr’s Copenhagen interpretation and David Bohm’s interpretation. The later cites an epistemic limitation rather than an ontological limitation in human inquiry. 9 Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 10 3.6 Summary Philosophical speculation tests hidden assumptions of our commitments in both science and theology. Is the Christian belief that the universe is not eternal but was created by a cause that is not a part of the universe philosophically coherent? Is there any philosophical ground to deny the Christian belief in creation by considering the speculations of philosophers of religion, Richard G. Swinburne and William Lane Craig? It is with the issue of time that much of the argument for and against the plausibility of a transcendent God rests. Both Swinburne and Craig take the view that God is not constrained by what I call chronic time (see chapter four on chronic and kairic time). There is no philosophical defeater to the claim that God created a non-eternal universe. We anticipate further progress from complexity and emergence models of organized information transfer, with the tantalizing possibility of understanding the process by which life emerged. We conclude that the idea of a creator God is philosophically cogent. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 11 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe (This preview is only a selection of the pages) 4. Theological Reflection On Creation 4.1 Trinitarian ‘Monotheism’ Among the world’s monotheistic religions, Christianity is distinguished by its distinct Trinitarianism. The field of monotheism is crowded with Judaism, Islam, and even some forms of Hinduism and Buddhism, not to mention many other lesser known religions of the world. In Christian Trinitarian, the three articles of creedal faith states that 1. God the Father created the world,10 2. Jesus the Son redeemed the world, and 3. The Holy Spirit sustains the community of faith 4.4 Kairic & Chronic Time Does Christianity teach that God created the beginning or that God created in the beginning? Genesis 1 begins with “In the beginning....” If we assume that this is the beginning of creation, then God created the beginning and not within the duration of a beginning. But what sort of beginning does this mean? It cannot mean the beginning of God, since God is beginningless, changeless (God does not get better with time)11, and timeless. It must mean that God created the beginning of time. Although it is possible that God takes time to create, God did not initially create in time because time was not yet created for it to have duration. However, once God created time itself, then from our perspective, it is possible to say that God created over some duration of time. 10 The concept of the ‘world’ is much larger today than it was among the ancients. It no longer refers only to the physical earth, or to the heavens and the earth (visible sky), or even the universe (visible and invisible). A theological definition of creation refers to just that, creation, which is more than nature and includes non-material existents. 11 This notion is in fact a part of process philosophy, first popularized by Alfred North Whitehead. It has since come to influence what is now called process theology. The argument here is that God evolves along with creation and increases in learning and experience. If God cannot really tell what will happen next, it accounts for why there is so much suffering and evil in the world in the presence of a good God. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 12 4.6 Summary Theological Reflection of the Christian Trinitarian faith offers a view of reality in which the emergence (creatio initio) and maintenance (creatio continua) of energy-matter conversions is teleological, i.e., with a purpose of an intentional will - the will of God. The ongoing working of nature is the continuing work of God and ought to concern the Church. The relationship between the natural sciences and the revelation of God may be expressed by what I call the task of the natural sciences to discover divine disclosure (DDD). Advances in new frontiers of the sciences understood in the light of scriptural teaching and models of kairic and chronic time offer bases for a fresh understanding of theological creation. The Christian Scriptures support the idea of creation from nothing, creatio ex nihilo, but one in which creation has not ceased but what we call divine providence is in fact the continuing work of God in a creatio continua. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 13 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Barbour, Ian G. When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers or Partners. New York: HarperSanFrancisco. 2000. 2. Barrow, John D. and Frank J. Tipler. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1986. 3. Barrow, John D. Theories of Everything. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1991. 4. Barrow, John D. and Joseph Silk. The Left Hand of Creation: The Origin and Evolution of the Universe. 2nd edition. New York: Oxford University Press. 1994. 5. Barrow, John D. The Origin of the Universe. New York: Basic Books. 1994. 6. Boslough, John. Stephen Hawking’s Universe. New York: Avon. 1985. 7. Bowler, Peter J. and Iwan Rhys Morus. Making Modern Science: A Historical Survey. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. 2005. 8. Brooke, John Hedley. Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1991. 9. Coles, Peter. Cosmology: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2001. 10. Copan, Paul and William Lane Craig. Creation Out of Nothing: A Biblical, Philosophical and Scientific Exploration. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. 2004. 11. Craig, William Lane. The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. 2000. 12. Craig, William Lane. “The Ultimate Question of Origins: God and the Beginning of the Universe” at http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/ultimatequestion.html 13. Craig, William Lane. “Theism and the Origin of the Universe” at http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/theism-origin.html. 14. Davies, Paul. The Last Three Minutes. New York: Basic Books. 1994. 15. Davies, Paul. The Fifth Miracle: The Search for the Origin of Life. London: Penguin Books. 2000. 16. Dyson, Freeman. Disturbing the Universe. New York: Harper and Row. 1979. 17. Einstein, Albert. Relativity: The Special and General Theory. New York: Wings Books. 1961. 18. Ellis, George F. R. and Ruth M. Williams. Flat and Curved Space-Times. New York: Oxford University Press. 1988. 19. Ferris, Timothy. The Whole Shebang. New York: Simon and Shuster. 1997. 20. Feynman, Richard P. QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1985. 21. Feynman, Richard P. Lectures on Gravitation. Reading: Addison-Wesley. 1995. 22. Geroch, Robert. General Relativity: From A to B. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1978. 23. Gilkey, Langdon. Maker of Heaven and Earth. New York: Doubleday. 1959. 24. Gunton, Colin. The Triune Creator: A Historical and Systematic Study. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1998. 25. Guth, Alan H. The Inflationary Universe. New York: Basic. 1997. 26. Hare, R. M. Plato, Past Masters series. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1982. 27. Harrison, Everett F. “Romans” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol 10. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 14 28. Hawking, Stephen W. A Brief History of Time. New York: Bantam Books. 1988. 29. Jenson, Robert W. Systematic Theology. Volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1999. 30. McGrath, Alister. I Believe: Exploring the Apostles’ Creed. Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press. 1997. 31. McGrath, Alister E. A Scientific Theology: Vol. 1. Nature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 2001. 32. Milne, Rich. “The Origin of the Universe” at http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/origuniv.html. 33. Moreland, J. P. Ed. The Creation Hypothesis. Downer’s Grove: IVP. 1994. 34. Moreland, J. P. and John Mark Reynolds. Eds. Three Views on Creation and Evolution. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 1999. 35. Newbigin, Lesslie. Foolishness to the Greeks. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1986. 36. Newbigin, Lesslie. The Gospel in a Pluralistic Society. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1989. 37. O'Connor, J. J. and E F Robertson, “A History of Quantum Mechanics” at http://www-gap.dcs.stand.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/The_Quantum_age_begins.html. Department of History of Mathematics, The University of St. Andrews, Scotland. 38. Penrose, Roger. The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1989. 39. Penrose, Roger. The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. 2005. 40. Peters, Ted and Martinez Hewlett. Evolution From Creation To New Creation: Conflict, Conversation, and Convergence. Nashville, TN: Abingdon. 2003. 41. Poythress, Vern S. Symphonic Theology. Phillipsburg, PA: P & R Publishing. 2001. 42. Rees, Martin. Just Six Numbers. New York: Basic. 2000. 43. Richardson, W. Mark and Wesley J. Wildman. Eds. Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue. New York: Routledge. 1996. 44. Ross, Allen P. “Proverbs” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Vol. 5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 1991. 45. Ross, Hugh. The Fingerprint of God. New Kensington: Whitaker House. 1989. 46. Russell, Robert J. “T=0, Is It Theologically Significant?” in W. Mark Richardson and Wesley J. Wildman. Eds. Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue. New York: Routledge. 1996. 47. Russell, Robert J. Ed. Fifty Years in Science and Religion: Ian G. Barbour and His Legacy. Burlington, VT: Ashgate. 2004. 48. Schleiermacher, Friedrich. The Christian Faith. Edited by H. R. Mackintosh and J. S. Stewart. Edinburgh: T and T Clark. 1999 [1830]. 49. Steinhardt, Paul J. and Neil Turok. Endless Universe: Beyond the Big Bang. New York: Doubleday. 2007. 50. Swinburne, Richard. The Existence of God. Rev. Ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991. [All the arguments together (not counting the Argument from Religious Experience) make it plausible to believe that God's existence is not improbable, not less than 1⁄2. The Principle of Credulity: unless we have some reason to reject an experience, we should take it as veridical. Since God's existence is not improbable even without religious experience, religious experience tips the balance]. 51. Torrance, Thomas F. Space, Time and Incarnation. Edinburgh: T & T Clark. 1997. 52. Toulmin, Stephen. The Return to Cosmology: Postmodern Science and the Theology of Nature. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 1982. 53. Wald, Robert. General Relativity. Chicago: Chicago University Press. 1984. Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe 15 54. Wiseman, James A. Theology and Modern Science: Quest for Coherence. New York: Continuum. 2002. 55. Weinberg, Steven. The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe. Updated edition. New York: Basic Books. 1988. 56. Wolterstorff, Nicholas. Reason Within the Bounds of Religion. Second Ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. 1984 (1976). 57. Worthing, Mark William. God, Creation, and Contemporary Physics. Minneapolis: Fortress. 1996. WEBSITES 1. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/linnaeus.html. 2. http://www.hawking.org.uk/about/aindex.html 3. http://www.counterbalance.net/ghc-bb/hhbb-frame.html 4. “The Four Pillars of the Standard Cosmology” at http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/bb_pillars.html 5. http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=2321 Copyright by Academy for Christian Thought. Contact admin@actministry.org. 16 Q1.Origin.of.the.Universe Books from ACT’s Online Store: www.actministry.org 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. AP1: The Paradox of Atheism (It Is Unbelievable What An Unbeliever has to Believe to be an Unbeliever) AP2: Why I Am Not An Atheist (Reply to Bertrand Russell) AP3: Christian Belief in a Postmodern World AP4: Christian Apologetics in a Postmodern World AP5: Christian Belief in a Scientific Age AP6: Quest for the Christian Mind AP7: What If They Have Never Heard? (Unevangelized Dead) BL1: Where Did the Bible Come From? BL2: Who Chose the Books of the Bible? BL3: What About the Lost Gospels? BL4: Is the Bible Accurate? BL5: Is the Bible Trustworthy? BL6: Archaeology and the Old Testament BL7: Archaeology and the New Testament BL8: The Dead Sea Scrolls (The Oldest Bible in the World) CH1: The Church in History, 70-313 (Early Patristic Age) CH2: The Church in History, 313-451 (Theological Age) CH3: The Church in History, 451-600 (Late Patristic Age) CH4: The Church in History, 600-800 (Early Medieval) CH5: The Church in History, 800-1200 (High Medieval) CH6: The Church in History, 1200-1400 (Late Medieval) CH7: The Church in History, 1400-1600 (Reformation) CH8: The Church in History, 1600-1800 (Reason & Science) CH9: The Church in History, 1800-1900 (Ideological Age) CH10: The Church in History, 1900–the Present (Post Christian Age) CH11: The Doctors of the Church (33 Who Shaped Theology) CH12: What Were the Latin Crusades? DM1: Paideia (Spiritual Formation of the Christian Mind) DM2: Cultural Spheres of Influence & Human Inquiry ET1: Why Ethics Matters ET2: Philosophical Anthropology NS1: Belief Beyond Biology PS1: Christianity & Philosophy in Plain Language PS2: Christianity & Science in Plain Language PS3: Christianity & Darwin in Plain Language PS4: Evolution & Evolutionism in Plain Language PS5: Knowledge & Belief in Science & Theology Q1: The Origin of the Universe (The Big Bang) Q2: The Origin of Life (The Big Birth) Q3: The Origin of Man (The Big Kahuna) Q4: The Origin of Consciousness (The Big Brain) TH1: What Christians Really Believe TH2: What is Roman Catholicism? TH3: What is Eastern Orthodoxy? WR1: What Every Christian Ought to Know About Hinduism WR2: What Every Christian Ought to Know About Buddhism WR3: What Every Christian Ought to Know About Islam WR4: The Bible & the Qur’an