Following the lead of Dr. William Lane Craig's recent debate with cosmologist Dr. Sean Carroll in the Greer-Heard Forum, this month's RTB meeting will focus on those aspects of modern cosmology that point to the God of the Bible. Dr. Craig invoked the Kalam cosmological argument, which posits that anything that began to exist has a cause. He then argued that the observed pattern of expansion of the universe plus the increase in entropy of the universe are strong evidences for a beginning of the universe in finite time. In addition, the observed fine-tuning of the universe in a way that life is possible is another way that cosmology is congruent with the Genesis account. Add to this the number of "goldilocks scenarios" that make our planet just right for the sustenance of intelligent life and the observation and understanding of the universe and you have a strong base of evidence that cosmology is compatible with a theistic view of our universe. |
References | ||
|
Go Back |
|
References | ||
|
Go Back |
|
References | ||
|
Go Back |
God and CosmologyWhen one looks at the question of how the universe began from the framework of physics, astronomy and cosmology, the picture is congruent with the picture one gets from Genesis. In particular, the standard model of physics points to a beginning of the universe in the finite past, and the modeling of processes in the universe finds a scenario which is exceptionally fine-tuned to a framework in which intelligent life is possible. What parts of modern cosmology point to a scenario consistent with Genesis?:
Hoyle: "I do not believe than any scientist who examined the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce inside the stars." Hawking & Mlodinow: "Such calculations show that a change of as little as 0.5% in the strength of the strong nuclear force, or 4 percent in the electric force, would destroy either nearly all carbon or all oxygen in every star, and hence the possibility of life as we know it. "
|
References | ||
|
Go Back |
Beginning of the UniverseWhen one looks at the question of how the universe began from the framework of physics, astronomy and cosmology, the picture is congruent with the picture one gets from Genesis. In particular, the standard model of physics points to a beginning of the universe in the finite past, and the modeling of processes in the universe finds a scenario which is exceptionally fine-tuned to a framework in which intelligent life is possible. Features which could have taken a wide range of values have just the right values to make possible a universe that supports life: Hoyle: "I do not believe than any scientist who examined the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed with regard to the consequences they produce inside the stars." Hawking & Mlodinow: "Such calculations show that a change of as little as 0.5% in the strength of the strong nuclear force, or 4 percent in the electric force, would destroy either nearly all carbon or all oxygen in every star, and hence the possibility of life as we know it. "
|
God and Cosmology References | ||
|
Go Back |
The Vastness of the UniverseWhen one looks at the question of how the universe began from the framework of physics, astronomy and cosmology, the picture is congruent with the picture one gets from Genesis. In particular, the standard model of physics points to a beginning of the universe in the finite past, and the modeling of processes in the universe finds a scenario which is exceptionally fine-tuned to a framework in which intelligent life is possible.
|
God and Cosmology References | ||
|
Go Back |