Tuesdays with Jesse
“Inauguration of the Creation”
Ranging across human’s exponentially rising intelligence and reasoning comes across one of the most debatable topics obfuscated through their individual plausible thinking; the creation of the world. Both scientists and believers, the two most distinctive types of reasoning has sought higher into the realm of philosophy to obtain what is true, or more precise, what they believe is to be true. How can we be sure of which is true when both sides have immense proofs yet tenacious enough in not accepting others’ input.
From a religious perspective, as Christian, it is written in Genesis that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Within the next seven days, he managed to give details and enhancements through his omnipotent supremacy. Questions then arises of why God wanted to create the world and humans followed by remarks such as an ordeal saying that God’s omniscient fixation would allow him to know that the would he created perfectly would fall into sin. It is blatant that we certainly do no know why God would create a world potential of having sin. Some say that it was due to tedium that brought God into creating the world. But some also cannot rebut this statement by saying that we should not question God’s authority; if he wanted to create a world, though he know there would be sin, then let him so. A simpler interpretation would be if we would like to cut something out of paper, even if we know it would not be perfectly straight, it would not stop our own authority in wanting to cut it. Nonetheless, this view is in contrast to what science should say.
Evolutionists, or generally scientists would likely reason the world through facts; plausible facts, of course. They presume that the knowledge they obtained through science would reveal the past itself. The innumerable laws contained in the realm of physics in account with the principles of atomic relationships in chemistry; all these were deduced to the “fact” that the world was created through the notorious “Big Bang” that ensues approximately millions of years ago. Additionally, with the assumption where the empty universe started with nothing but an unstable point of energy (stable for eternity, but then explodes) expanding filling up the everlasting space. This is of course, chemically impossible, for a chemical reaction would most likely react instantaneously. In accordance to the findings of Penzias and Wilson (1965), a static model of the universe was undermined by the ‘3k hum’ of an unidentified background noise and a hydrogen atom. Their finding and the correlation with the laws of physics and chemistry awarded them with an accolade of a Nobel prize. Referring to this, a hydrogen atom is chemically unstable where it needs to react with another element with opposing force of energy. Then what was the force of energy? It is concluded to be God himself; at least, for some religious scientists. Many other forms of science tried to reason the enigma of our world. Thus, still ensues the strives of human knowledge for the future.
To end the discussion, it would be quite reprehensible to be credulous in one of the two descriptions above or to ignore them. Take a moment to think critically and take there two, both plausible remarks into account. I myself believed partially on both. For I consider my truth to be that God created the would through the Big Bang that lasted seven days (Yes, this means that I believe that God intentionally created the Big Bang himself, but contrary to what scientists thought of being millions of years, the omnipotent God, would be able to shorten the time, or maybe even because his time adjustments are different than us humans). Whatever or wherever your truths lies, be ensured that you know you have the right to have the faculty of wonder of your whole existence; in this period of time, in this would, in this whole cryptic fixation.
“The only thing we require to be good philosophers is the faculty of wonder.” – Sophie’s World