Big Bang

The idea of “ creatio ex nihilo ” entered the arena of natural science with the advent of modern cosmology in the mid-twentieth century. This idea, that is, the creation of the universe out of nothing, seems to be a consequence of the widely accepted Big Bang Theory which implies the temporal finitude of the world. In order to avoid the theological and metaphysical implications of such an idea, some scenarios and scientific models have been proposed. According to one of the scenarios, the creation ex nihilo of the world is a causal physical phenomenon, and, hence, can be explained scientifically by appealing to the laws of nature.In this essay, I aim to discuss and criticize this idea.To fulfill this aim, in the introduction some achievements of modern cosmology will be very briefly introduced. In the next three sections, the notions of existence and nothingness, creation,scientific explanation, and singularity will be explored.It will be shown that what philosophers mean by these notions isradically different fromthe naïve ideas of some scientists. Hence, applying these notions to physical models of the origin of the universe is completely misleading.This work concludes that no scientific explanation appealing to the laws of nature can possibly explainthe creation of the universe out of nothing.

William Craig has sought to defend theism by participating in numerous debates. In a debate with the American philosopher Sinnott Armstrong, which is also published in a book entitled "God", Craig in his first reason tries to prove the existence of God by denying "real infinity" and relying on the concept of beginning and "the need of every beginning for a cause". On the other hand, he takes Big Bang as a witness to his claim, but Armstrong rejects Craig's argument by referring to the existence of real infinity in the outside world and the existence of scientific evidence to negate the implication of the Big Bang on the beginning of the world. Based on this, when it is not possible to properly use experimental evidence as a proof of theological reasoning, such methods can put the belief in God in crisis. Therefore, lack of establishing the correct interaction between theology and science can be considered one of the most important weaknesses of Craig's argument on the existence of God. Finally, by introducing a scientific model, it is possible to provide a solution to establish a correlation between science and theology in such a way that theological evidence matches with experimental evidence and external truth, and no contradiction threatens the belief in God.