Secular science has excluded God from its framework, leading to unceasing efforts to explain the universe’s existence. The Big Bang theory remains the dominant explanation, but it is not the only one. This is an overview of secular theories on the origins or lack of origins of the universe and the reasons for our existence.
During the Enlightenment, cosmology swiftly rejected God as the universe’s primary cause, leading scientists to pursue natural explanations for its existence. At first, many maintained that the universe had always existed. Later, the Big Bang theory emerged, proposing that it came into existence around 14 billion years ago. Today, this remains the dominant explanation.
The Big Bang theory remains incomplete and has its critics, some of whom argue for an eternal universe with no beginning or end. Scientists who accept the theory continue to grappth than by his strong opposition to the religious implications of the Big Bang theory. He believle with the question of what caused the universe to exist. While some persist in searching for answers, a topic we will address next time, others dismiss the inquiry as futile. This raises the question of whether such a pursuit is truly without merit.
The steady-state theory
Initially, most scientists believed the universe had no beginning and no end. This view was prevalent in the 1920s when Sir James Jeans introduced the steady-state theory, also known as the theory of a stationary universe. However, it was not until 1948 that Sir Fred Hoyle and other scientists developed a specific steady-state model. They proposed that, although the universe is expanding, new matter is continuously created, allowing it to maintain a constant density. Under this model, the universe would have neither a starting point nor a final state.
Hoyle was motivated less by a pursuit of scientific trued that the idea of a universe with a beginning too closely resembled the biblical account of creation. As a result, he vigorously opposed it along with his colleagues, arguing instead for the eternity of the universe.1
When astrophysicists discovered evidence of the universe’s expansion, later confirmed in the 1960s, particularly with the detection of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), the dominant view became that the universe had a beginning. The steady-state theory was largely abandoned by the scientific community, though a small number of researchers continue to develop it under the quasi-steady-state model.
The eternally expanding universe
Modern science appears to have reached two conflicting conclusions. On one hand, the universe seems to be infinite in space. If it is infinite now, it must always have been infinite. On the other hand, the universe is expanding, at least locally, with galaxies moving farther apart. These two ideas can be reconciled through the concept of an eternally expanding universe. In this model, the universe never had a beginning, but the density of matter has changed over time. In the past, matter was more concentrated than it is today and continues to spread out.2
For these scientists, the Big Bang does not signify the beginning of the universe but rather the point at which it assumed its current physical laws. It is generally accepted that all fundamental forces, including electromagnetism, gravity, and the strong and weak interactions, were once unified as a single force. During this period, different physical laws may have applied, though their nature remains unknown.3 There is also the unresolved question of how densely elementary particles could have been packed before the Big Bang.
The oscillating universe
Another theory combines the Big Bang with the idea of an eternal universe. The oscillating universe theory suggests that the universe undergoes cycles of collapse and re-expansion. This model requires the universe’s critical mass density (Ω) to be greater than 1. If that were the case, the total mass of the universe would eventually slow its expansion and cause it to contract. In the end, the universe would collapse into a singularity, the reverse of the Big Bang, before another Big Bang followed.4
This theory has notable weaknesses. First of all, scientific data indicate that the universe’s expansion is accelerating rather than slowing, even though Ω is almost certainly equal to 1. This value is not enough to cause the universe to collapse. Second of all, no known mechanism could trigger successive Big Bangs, let alone the current one.5
In the beginning… there was no beginning
In 1983, James Hartle and Stephen Hawking, both proponents of the Big Bang theory, introduced a new perspective on the subject.6 The Hartle-Hawking model, also known as the no-boundary proposal, aims to reconcile the universe’s infinite spatial extent with its finite temporal existence. The model is based on Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which states that three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time are inseparably connected as four-dimensional spacetime. Consequently, space influences time, and time influences space.
Quantum mechanics introduces the concept of Planck time, equal to 0.54 × 10⁻⁴³ seconds (or 5.4 × 10⁻⁴⁴ seconds), which is considered the fundamental unit of time in nature. Below this threshold, time behaves in the same way as spatial dimensions. Hartle and Hawking applied this principle to the Big Bang, arguing that discussing events before the universe had existed for 0.54 × 10⁻⁴³ seconds is meaningless. 7. Stephen Hawking concluded, ‘The universe spontaneously emerged from nothing’.8
Is this still science?
A fundamental aspect of science, particularly modern science, is the search for rational explanations of the phenomena around us. The same applies to the existence of the universe. However, the cosmological theories discussed above reflect more of a struggle against identifying its origins and causality. If the universe has no beginning, or if the concept of a beginning is meaningless, then it has no cause either. The universe exists because it exists. There is no reason to search for a cause, as there is none.
Is this truly a scientific position, or does it amount to an intellectual surrender to what is beyond human understanding? While atheists and agnostics may see this as incomprehensible, believers consider it self-evident. Everything in the universe has a rational cause, and the universe itself is no exception. Its cause must exist beyond the universe. The Book of Genesis clearly states: ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.’9 Just as a potter is not part of the vessel he forms, God is not part of the universe but exists beyond it. The choice is between a primal cause and absurdity, a rational God and meaninglessness.
In part two, we will examine secular theories proposed by scientists who seek to explain the cause of the universe.
By the way, we recommend reading the articles:
- Homo Erectus – Ape or Human?
- The Evolutionary Roots of Racism
- The Babylonian Exile – A Historically Confirmed Biblical Prophecy
- Do UFOs Exist? – Part 1: Reported Sightings
- Do UFOs Exist? – Part 2: The Forces Behind the Phenomenon
Footnotes
- Pomeroy, R., 2018. How Anti-Religious Bias Prevented Scientists from Accepting the Big Bang. Space.com. Available at: https://www.space.com/40586-anti-religious-bias-the-big-bang.html.
- Prescod-Weinstein, C., 2021. Why the Big Bang May Not Have Been the Beginning of the Universe. New Scientist. Available at: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25033400-200-why-the-big-bang-may-not-have-been-the-beginning-of-the-universe/.
- Faulkner, D.R., 2019. Secular Alternatives to the Big Bang Are Expanding. Answers in Genesis. Available at: https://answersingenesis.org/big-bang/secular-alternatives-big-bang-expanding/.
- Villanueva, J.C., 2009. What is the Oscillating Universe Theory? Universe Today. Available at: https://www.universetoday.com/38195/oscillating-universe-theory/.
- Faulkner, D.R., op. cit.
- Wolchover, N., 2019. Physicists Debate Hawking’s Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning. Quanta Magazine. Available at: https://www.quantamagazine.org/physicists-debate-hawkings-idea-that-the-universe-had-no-beginning-20190606/.
- Faulkner, D.R., op. cit.
- Holden, M., 2010. God Did Not Create the Universe, Says Hawking. Reuters. Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-hawking-idUSTRE6811FN20100902.
- The Bible, New King James Version, 1982, Genesis 1:1.
© Source of main image: Canva.
The portal EvolutionOfThinking.org, created by the Research and Education Institute, focuses on education and the dissemination of knowledge related to research on various aspects of human well-being.
