Nothing should exist, yet it does.

I’m talking about things existing in and of themselves. Since all things need a beginning, nothing can exist of itself. If nothing can exist of itself, then nothing should exist at all.

So why are we here? Is that the job of science to answer or philosophy? How about religion?

Let’s clarify some. Science does not exist to answer why; it exists to answer how. It is the realm of philosophy to answer why.

Science: Observe, postulate, theorize, test. Prove or disprove. Adjust, theorize more, test. Prove / disprove. Science can’t tell you why gravity works, just how it works. It can’t tell you why electrons have a negative charge and protons a positive charge, just that they do and how they interact. Science can’t even tell you “why” they interact. Science can look at the underlying forces that cause them to interact, but that’s still in the realm of “how”, not “why”.

We observe what appears to be an ever-expanding universe. There are abundant data that lends itself to the confirmation of a theory called “The Big Bang”. In this theory, it is postulated that all the matter in the universe was contained in a spherical shape whose diameter was no more than the diameter of the period at the end of this sentence. Of course, this postulate cannot be proven, but it can be inferred from other evidence. If this object did at one time exist, there are two questions that begged to be asked.

How did this mass come into being?

What caused this mass to become unstable and to explode?

You see, this mass had to have a beginning. There are actually theories that attempt to explain how our universe originated as well and how this object which had the entire mass of the universe in such a small area came to be. But those theories postulate the pre-existence of other objects; other planes. Where, then, did those planes originate?

You see, no matter what scientists postulate and what the evidence infers, we will always take one step further back and try to explain how that earlier object came into being. And then that object, and so on.

All things need a beginning.

Let’s set this aside for a moment and look at the second question.

Astrophysics has pretty much confirmed the existence of black holes: objects whose mass is so great that the gravitational force of the mass overcomes the force that keeps atoms separated. A black hole is so massive that it collapses on itself, becoming ever denser, pulling more mass into it, if available. The only way for a black hole to actually lose mass is through a form of “evaporation”.

If all the mass in the universe once existed in a very small space, the gravitational force of that mass should be greater than all the other forces that would otherwise push the matter apart. What, then, would cause this mass to explode in a “big bang”?

Would you be surprised to learn that the Bible has no mention of the term “supernatural”? In fact, the concept of the supernatural originated with Greek philosophers. I’ll not go into the details of this now, but the separation between natural and supernatural is not a part of Hebrew or Biblical history or philosophy. To eastern religions and philosophy, all that we see and know is natural. Biblical Judaism is not a western religion, it is eastern. The apostles were Jewish and also did not see a separation between natural and supernatural.

Nevertheless, the Bible talks about “miracles”. The original languages of the bible describe “miracles” as “power works”. Think about it. The only thing that could cause a stable mass, or even a somewhat unstable mass to suddenly explode is an input of energy – a power work. The greatest advances in science that would seem like magic to less technological societies are accomplished by the application of energy. Flight. Space Travel. Lasers. Computers. Automobiles. Petroleum refining. Manufacturing of Steel. Television. Radio. All forms of manufacturing. All accomplished by applying energy to a process that would otherwise product either nothing at all or chaos.

What is the single most influential driver of weather on earth? The sun. Without it, earth would be a frozen wasteland. What of the sun drives the weather? Energy. Heat. Light.

God does not operate in the “supernatural”, for all things are natural to Him. He created this universe and set the boundaries of it. He needs to break no rules to accomplish His will. He just applies energy in very specific ways.

God and science are not opposites, they are complementary. God gives us our “why”. Science can tell us the “how”. When we refuse to allow science to accept something larger than the “normal” (as opposed to the “natural), we limit science’s ability to explain some “how”s. If science can reasonably explain a “how” without an external “supernormal” application of energy, that’s OK. But scientists who force science to operate under their philosophy (either direction), warp the conclusions. Those warped conclusions reflect the underlying philosophy of the scientists.

The “Big Bang” has problems. There are a lot of data that are ignored because they disprove the theory, but if the ignored data were accepted, then many scientists would need to amend their philosophy. Hmmmmm.

As much as science and philosophy must be kept separate, we find it impossible at some point to do so.

Think about it.{moscomment}

This entry was posted in Christianity, Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.