The beginning and the end
Here's a combination of views that I think a lot of people like me (college-educated Christians from evangelical churches) hold more or less unreflectively:
That's kind of a weird combination. At any rate, there's an asymmetry. Physics tells us how the universe began, but not how it will end. That is, it's silly to think that the beginning of the universe would be different from what it looks like it was---that the past would be discontinuous with what we observe. And yet it's sensible to think that the end of the universe will be different from what it looks like it will be: again, discontinuous with what we observe.
Maybe this asymmetry is okay. After all, it really does feel like our pastward and futureward extrapolations are based on different kinds of evidence. But I don't really know what to say.
(Or maybe Christians who take both eschatology and science seriously need to believe the energy density of the universe will stay delicately balanced forever? Or maybe they should believe the final return and resurrection is in an important way non-physical? Anyone?)
- Young-earth creationism is silly. The scientific evidence (biology, geology, cosmology) overwhelmingly suggests that the earth is four or five billion years old, the universe began in a Big Bang about thirteen billion years ago, etc., etc.
- Some kind of broadly millenial eschatology is sensible. The universe will not end in a gradual cold death, wiping out all possibility of life as the energy density goes to zero (as suggested by the current observations of the amount of matter in the universe, as far as I know), or for that matter in a heat death where the universe collapses again toward a singularity. Rather, God will redeem the world, restoring the universe to a state of perfect justice when Christ returns, and so on. Alternatively, God will destroy the universe and replace it with a good one (somehow managing to get people from this one to the other one—don't ask me).
That's kind of a weird combination. At any rate, there's an asymmetry. Physics tells us how the universe began, but not how it will end. That is, it's silly to think that the beginning of the universe would be different from what it looks like it was---that the past would be discontinuous with what we observe. And yet it's sensible to think that the end of the universe will be different from what it looks like it will be: again, discontinuous with what we observe.
Maybe this asymmetry is okay. After all, it really does feel like our pastward and futureward extrapolations are based on different kinds of evidence. But I don't really know what to say.
(Or maybe Christians who take both eschatology and science seriously need to believe the energy density of the universe will stay delicately balanced forever? Or maybe they should believe the final return and resurrection is in an important way non-physical? Anyone?)
Posted by Jeff on Saturday, January 06, 2007
4 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
Don't most evangelical Christians that believe in the big bang think that it didn't just happen, but was initiated by God? And does that change the (a)symmetry of what you are proposing?
On a side note, you may be overestimating the number of people who think that young-earth creationism is silly. Something like 45% of Americans in a Gallup Poll in 2001 believed that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10K years or so." See David Quammen's "Darwin or Not" article from National Geographic in 2005.
(edited for stupid mistakes stemming from lack of sleep, but there's no guarantee that there aren't more stupid mistakes in there somewhere)
but even so, we think the big bang happened---that the universe's history is continuous with what the best physical theories and our present observations tell us. i certainly don't mean to imply that i or "lots of people like me" deny creationism broadly speaking---i.e. that god supplies the reason for the universe's existence. we just think that this is consistent with the story told by the aforementioned theories and observations.
also, i certainly don't deny that an alarming number of people have no qualms about dismissing that story. i only said that "a lot of people like me" are more impressed by it.
but what about the future?
Nice question. The same point arises for educated but serious Catholics, like me, or Orthodox.
I think it has to do with the apparent deceptiveness of the historical record, given young-earth creationism. The idea that God would plant really-old-seeming dinosaur bones etc. just seems wrong, as God is no deceiver, etc. If God had created the physical universe suddenly 10k years ago, we'd expect it to look different. But if God were going to wrap up the physical universe, we wouldn't expect it to look different. (Would we?) There's the asymmetry.
David, USC
Post a Comment
<< Home