The question of our origins is doubtless a subject of perplexity whose puzzlement has mused at the edges of what can be understood. Modern science and objective reason have shed an enumerable richness in our knowledge of the cosmos. Shaking off the cloud of obscurity which has covered our notions of mankind's origins. And yet our understanding of what we observe is shaded in our interpretations of what we believe to be. Often what is objectively evident must sift threw the deluge of speculation and philosophical prejudice. While that may be, the facts of what is known galvanize under the growing weight of evidence. The characteristics of the order round about us emerges ever more discernible.


THE BIRTH OF HYDROGEN


According to current wisdom, our universe began about 15 billion years ago at a point with infinite density, infinite temperature and zero size. What followed was the beginning of time and the origin of space. Expanding in all directions was a tiny, hot, dense explosion of all matter in the universe. It was tiny in the sense that all matter, and even space itself, was condensed into a single point.


Within a ridiculously small fraction of a second, the universe expanded enough, and thereby cooled sufficiently, for the fundamental interactions to evolve into the ones we know about today. Very soon after that, but still only a fraction of a second old, the fundamental particles in the universe were cool enough to condense into protons and neutrons. After about a 100 seconds, the protons and neutrons were cool enough to begin to form nuclei. The nuclei which stood forth were that of the helium nucleus and the heavier hydrogen nucleus. Protons and Neutrons taking refuge under the inherent stability of the helium and hydrogen nuclei.


By the time the universe was 4 minutes old, the primordial period of nuclear synthesis was over and all the basic ingredients required for all that was to follow were present and their basic modes of interaction were established. The stage was set for everything that followed.


After about 400,000 years, the universe was sufficiently cool and the density sufficiently low, slowing the rapidly moving protons and electrons to speeds that allowed the forming of stable atoms. When atoms formed, the ingredients present coupled with the particle recipes for hydrogen and helium resulted in an atomic mix of about 92 percent hydrogen, 8 percent helium, and a fraction of a percent deuterium. Hydrogen consists of one proton with one electron circling it. Helium consists of two protons and two electrons. These are the most base elements. Primary on the element table. Today, 15 billion years after hydrogen and helium were first formed, these elements remain the most abundant throughout the cosmos: hydrogen makes up approximately 90 percent of the total, whereas helium comes in at about 9 percent.


200 million years after the birth of space, matter and time, hydrogen and helium atoms clumped into amorphous clouds. These massive clouds, which by density and pressure, spontaneously and slowly contract under their own gravity. As they condense their core temperatures rise. By this mechanism stars are formed. Stars form singularly or in clusters. Clusters may form binary systems. Single stars or sets will form orbits around a common barycenter. Embedded in this environment emerged galactic systems distributed across the far reaches of the observable universe. A cosmos populated by 200 billion galaxies. Being home to 50 billion trillion stars.


The world as we observe it is a consequence of the balance between the number of hydrogen nuclei and the number of helium nuclei, established in the early moments after the big bang. Perhaps it is preferable to say that the world is a consequence of the basic laws that produced this particular blend of hydrogen and helium. Did the laws of nature exist prier to the origin of the universe ? Did the laws of nature take their present form at the instant of the big bang ? One millionth of a second after the big bang ? No one can say. Looking back, however, we can say the following: if the weak nuclear force, one of the fundamental forces of nature, had been just a little weaker, the universe would have started out as predominantly helium rather than hydrogen. A world without hydrogen is a world without carbohydrates, a world without proteins, a world without life. We can say that the world has its origins in the way the laws of nature emulate. Or we can say that the world is the way it is because hydrogen is the way it is.


THE PREDETERMINED ORDER


As Stephen Hawking has noted, "The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron..... The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life.


The existence of everything in the cosmos depends on these finely-tuned cosmological laws, constants, and formula. Each of which must fall within a very narrow range of value. In most cases, if a single mathematical variable was altered just slightly, life could not exist. The scientific literature lists nearly 100 examples of these perfectly-calibrated values. They include the strong nuclear force constant, weak nuclear force constant, gravitational force constant, electromagnetic force constant, expansion rate of the universe, density rate of the universe, velocity of light, decay rate of protons, radiation uniformity, entropy levels, etc.


Matter, as it were, does not just exist. But rather it stands forth from those calibrations which determine its form. The extreme improbability that so many variables would align so auspiciously in our favor merely by chance has led some scientists and philosophers to propose instead that the cosmos is providentially engineered to suit our specific needs. This is the Anthropic Principle: that the universe appears to have been fine tuned for our existence. Anthropic means “human” or “human existence.” Principle means “law.” The Anthropic Principle is the Law of Human Existence.


As we look out into the Universe and identify by means of physics and astronomy the characteristics of the cosmos that have worked together to our benefit, it becomes evident that the order round about us has known that we were coming. As though the laws which have organized and characterized the cosmos we live in bare the mark of purpose. Not unlike a means to an end. That the cosmic order would beget intelligence, being in service to this purpose. In other words, that the needs of mankind and the relationship between man and the order around about him was understood long ago. And in the most complete and fullest sense have the needs and parameters which uphold mans existence been sown to with reason and purpose.


Why is it difficult to infer the hand of purpose in the things that are evidently seen. The alternatives which may be offered are baseless, unscientific speculations. There is no proof of multi-verses, no wisdom that suggests that random chance alone must be the ultimate and inflexible law of nature, no reason to believe any thing than what is factually represented. It is the implication of what we have come to know which speak for themselves. Not unlike Einsteins theory of relativity which proposed that space behaves as a fabric. Whose empirical proof rested in the observation of light which appeared to bend in the presence of gravitational fields. So, there by, the concept of space and time behaving as a fabric was objectively established and excepted. Gravity did not need to put on a shirt and jeans to prove it self. It was enough for the observable to infer the nature of the conceptual. Is not the nature of the cosmic order, as well, evident ?


Ask yourself, “What’s the probability that so many finely-tuned, cosmic constants would align so perfectly by cosmic chance at the beginning of the cosmos?” Certainly we see random chance as a function in nature. Serving to extend the form of creativity, complexity and diversity. It is reasonable to say that chance is not the theory of every thing. Chance serves a purpose in the motions of things. Order as well declares its purpose.




THE REVOLUTION OF GENESIS


The discussion of origins has in ages past found its footing in the biblical creation texts of Genesis. Expressing 6 days of creation wrought by one omnipotent, transcendent God, the Genesis account ,though visually stunning, deals with issues which do not appear to be immediately relevant to the modern reader. This disconnect arises from withdrawing the scripture from its original context and meaning. One cannot arbitrarily substitute one's own intellectual issues and literary assumptions. Certainly the relevance of the Bible is not restricted to the ancient world, but too much haste in applying the Bible to our own situation, lifting its words out of context, may seriously misinterpret and misapply its message.


The crucial question in the creation account of Genesis 1 was polytheism, a believe in many gods, versus monotheism, the believe in one ultimate God. That was the burning issue of the day. The Jewish monotheism was a unique and hard-won faith. Every nation surrounding Israel, both great and small, was polytheistic, and many Jews themselves had similar inclinations. Along with the overwhelming polytheism of the ancient world was the accompanying mythologies which declared nature to be the realm of divine beings to be feared and reverenced. This had the effect of placing nature in the realm of the unknowable. Not to be understood and utilized but mystified and deified.


This polytheistic mythology hung with great portent over the daily lives of men and women. Institutionalizing cognitive obscurity which defined the perceptions of antiquity. Such systems of understanding employed mythic tales of origins. Serving to underpin, legitimize and establish the institutional polytheism of the day.


The Genesis text of origins was nothing less than a revolution of thought. Pressing back the ambiguous superstitions, the underpinning philosophical constructs and religious institutions which had no basis in objective reality. Mans sense of reason was largely darkened and limited in its capacity to wrestle with the facts of life. The Genesis creation text offered an escape from the confines of a deified, unknowable natural realm. What was formerly divine or a divine region is now declared to be creature. Nature, in fact, could not become nature in the sense in which we have come to use the term today until it was emptied of divinity by monotheistic faith, nor could science and natural history become possible until nature was thoroughly demythologized.


Without this legitimizing of nature and its laws, without this demythologizing of nature, science and historiography would not be worth doing or free to function. Nature is naturalized and history is historicized by the affirmation of the creation of the world. By virtue of creation, all aspects of the natural order and all events in time are worthy of attention and investigation. The creation account, therefore, is not science and history but is the basis of science and history.


The fundamental question at stake, then, was not the scientific question of how the cosmos achieved its form and by what process. It was not the historical question about time periods and chronological order. The issue was philosophical, not scientific; theology, not chronology. The Genesis creation text is an affirmation of faith in one transcendent God, purging the obscurity of polytheistic mysticism and the institutional confines of deified nature mythology. Providing for men an objective metaphysical view of existence. Rendering for man the cognitive capacity to realize a renascence of objectivity.


Attempting to be loyal to the Bible by turning the creation accounts into a kind of science or history is like trying to be loyal to the teachings of Jesus by arguing that his parables are actual historical events and are only reliable and trustworthy when taken literally as historical reports.




THE COSMOS OF GENESIS 1


Other than being an assault on the intellectual strongholds of the ancient world, Genesis 1 does present a view on origins and processes of the universe which is informative and insightful. Expressing a view of the cosmos which modern science only in recent years as grown to appreciate.


The emphasis in the entire account is on creation as the creation of order, which is what cosmological literature is about : the establishment of a cosmos. The primary interest is in the source of the present world-order and who was in control of this order. The text is not specifically concerned with the notion of something being created out of nothing. Rather the primary concern is the establishment of an orderly cosmos. The primary analogy being used, therefore, is that of ordering and ruling, rather than that of making and fashioning.


The act of creating in Genesis 1 is manifest in the sense of lordship and ordering. As it were, the potter masters and shapes the clay. In this sense the act of creating is to have control over a medium and give form and order to it. Matter and energy is inferred as proceeding from God, governed by God, and fashioned by God. Creation, in this sense, is not a depiction of things merely appearing. Rather the governance of God over process. Implying creativity is an expression of Gods eternal nature.


Regarding process, the logic of the text deals with fundamental problems in establishing an orderly cosmos. These conditions are described in verse 2 of Genesis as (formless earth, darkness, and watery deep). They are not negative realities but are ambiguous ones. Their inferred chaos is given not value of good or evil. The chaos of the realities merely is. Having no portrayal of malignant or perverse entity against Gods will. The tranquility of the account offers no war between good and evil. The three elements with which the creative process begins are neither chaotic forces nor a nihilating nothingness.


A part of the ambiguity of these elements is their intrinsic amorphousness. Water has no shape of its own. Darkness, similarly, has no form and is in turn dissolvent of form. Earth, too, is basically formless, whether as sand, dirt, or clay. And is doubly formless when engulfed by formless and form destroying water and darkness.


The fundamental problems confronting the establishment of an orderly cosmos, the the logic of the account, are first confronted and accommodated. The amorphousness and ambiguosness of water, darkness, and formless earth must be dealt with. The procedure of the account, then, is to begin with a description of a threefold problem which is given a solution in the first three days of creation. The method is architectural. It resembles that of an architect, planning a great edifice, who must first take into account the stability and reliability of the building. Securing the location and foundation accordingly.


Keep in mind that the process is not a liner history but is conceptual regarding the themes of the body of the text. The first day takes care of the problem of darkness through the creation of light. The second day takes care of the problem of water through the creation of a firmament in the sky to separate the water into the waters above (rain, snow, hail) and the waters below (sea, rivers, lakes). The third day takes care of the problem of formless earth by freeing earth from water and darkness and assigning it to a middle region between light and darkness, sky and underworld.


The solution of these three realms readies the cosmos for the population of these various regions in the following three days. Like a house that has been readied for its inhabitants. In fact, the third day also takes care of providing food for its forthcoming residence through the creation of vegetation. We thus observe a symmetrical division of the account into three movements (Problem, Preparation, Population), each with three elements.


The light and darkness of the day one are populate by the sun, moon, and stars of day four. The sky and water of day two are populated by the birds and fish day five. The earth and vegetation of day three makes possible the population by land animals and human beings of day six. The formlessness and emptiness of the earth are now formed and filled. This is the logic of the account. It is not chronological, scientific, or historical. It is cosmological.


If one could derive a historical or chronological theme, it would be one of purposeful events culminate in a predetermined outcome. If one could derive a scientific notion from the Genesis 1 text, it would be the profound completeness of the observable universe. The scientifically observable purposeful-structure and fundamentally calibrated-order of nature and the cosmos. It embraces the totality of the whole through the significance of the individual parts. Its preference is the provision for and the existence of mankind.


“Rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.” Proverbs 8 : 31





ORDER AND RANDOMNESS IN CREATION


The general thesis that there is no purposive intelligence at work in the universe as a whole is held to be supported by the existence of random mutations, happenstance configurations, etc. (e.g., the lottery or roulette method which nature appears to use in arriving at certain particular forms).


The evidence which suggests symmetry, rationality, progressive development and orderliness have been taken by theists to point toward a Creator. Those evidences which suggest chance occurrence, random accident, unpredictability, irrationality and the like are taken by non-theists to point toward the fundamentally “mindless” and aimless character of reality. Both positions can claim a sizable amount of empirical evidence in their favor. And when confronted with the opposite forms of evidence, both attempt to explain them in terms of the forms of evidence they take to be primary. It may be that the differing interpretations of design versus chance, order versus randomness arise from a narrow definition of control.


The two kinds of experiences and evidence, design versus randomness, do not necessarily lead to opposite conclusions. Creativity actually involves elements of both. Since the analogy employed in the use of the words Creator and creation is that of human creativity, creative acts cannot be totally identical with design. There are, in fact, forms of creativity in which the element of conscious design is minimal and the element of randomness is dominant. These creations are not the result of an inability to have mastery and control over the creative process and its materials, but they arise out of an understanding of creativity which stresses other values and objectives.


Creation is not only a demonstration of the degree of the artist's power, authority, and dominion but the skillful employment of the elements of passivity and unpredictability. Letting things happen is as interesting as making them happen. Immediacy and interaction are as valuable as calculation and control. Surprise is as delightful as predetermination. Purposeless play is as important as purposeful work. It is not that there is a lack of knowledge, power and control, but that these capacities are held, to some degree, abeyance. The artist chooses to create in such a way that other values and possibilities are realized. The dynamic of the creative process is, then, the result of the interrelationship between the two sets of aesthetic principles, and between the artist and the medium, the creator and the created.


It seems, in this sense, that God appears to “play dice” with the universe. Science, therefore, like theology, has had to moderate the principles of rationality and determinacy to include the principles of irrationality and uncertainness. Is this a loss ? Definitely not.


The inclusion of a principle of uncertainty adds immeasurably to the richness of possibilities and values. It is chance in the context of order that introduces the added dynamic of variability and randomness, as well as drama and history. The distinct advantage of a system which combines law and chance occurrence is that if ironclad law alone existed, only a limited number of possibilities would be realized, and the system would be static and closed. By adding the dimension of chance and some maneuvering room, one increases the range of potential forms. And given a generous amount of time, increases the opportunity for them to be actualized. Freedom, flexibility, and change become important aspects of the dynamic of the system.


The affirmation of creation is the most radical of all statements, both in the sense of being a statement that reaches out to the furthest extremity and in the sense of speaking to and out of the fundamental root and center of all things. The notion of God, our Creator, and mans presence in the cosmos as being purposeful and born of purpose, validates, and if necessary, corrects in conceptual terms what man has merely sensed about the nature of his existence. Thus transforming a wordless feeling into clearly verbalized knowledge, and laying a firm foundation, and intellectual roadbed, for the course of his life.