The Big Bang theory attempts to answer the question as to How are we here?. Whilst the religious myths aim to answer Why are we here?. The Big Bang theory suggests that we are here due to the idea that a small area of condensed energy and heat exploded and formed atoms, the building blocks of life. However, the Judeo-Christian creation myths state that God created the universe as a utopia for us to grow and thrive in. Religion is able to offer its followers a sense of purpose which is something the Big Bang theory cannot provide.
However, there are some other philosophers, including Immanuel Kant, who object this argument, disputing facts about the existence of God. In light of this prelude, this paper intends to focus on discussing Kant’s objection to the Ontological Argument proposed by Anselm, and bring in light the different views of both Kant and Anselm in regards to the claim
Hume aims to challenge the structure of the cosmological argument and questions the validity of the assumption that things that exist need causes or reasons for their existence. Hume says that just because each of the elements of the ‘chain’ has a cause, it doesn’t follow that the chain itself needs an initial cause. Furthermore, Hume suggested that we have no experience of universes being made and it is simply not possible to argue from causes within the universe to causes of the universe as a whole. There is a logical jump which the argument fails to recognise. It is one thing to talk about causes that operate within the system of the universe, but it is an entirely different matter to theorise about whether the universe as a whole is caused.
In Dialogues concerning Natural religion Hume explores whether or not faith is rational. as a result of Hume is AN philosopher (i.e. somebody WHO thinks that every one information comes through experience), he thinks that a belief is rational given that it's sufficiently supported by experiential proof. therefore the question is absolutely, is there enough proof within the world to permit North American country to infer AN infinitely sensible, wise, powerful, excellent God? Hume doesn't raise whether or not we are able to rationally prove that God exists, however rather whether or not we are able to rationally return to any conclusions regarding God's nature.
This theory was said to have occurred over 13 billion years ago. The most common theory that exists on how the universe came to be that has the most proof. It was thought of in the 1920´s and claims that the Big Bang was thought of how our universe came to be. It is said that 380,000 years after this event light was able to shine into the
Those arguments would a include saying such as by Dr. Christopher S. Baird of West Texas A&M University “The universe is most likely infinite”. In this argument Dr. Baird states that it would be impossible to simulate the universe as it stretches out to infinity. This argument is negated as we can not verify as a definitive that universe stretches out to infinity as the universe could be finite but expands when a entity tries to go past on what already has been seen so it would be possible to simulate the universe. A great example of how a computer would simulate the universe being infinite would be minecraft as it is a game that procedurally generates the world as the player goes on. Another refuting claim would be of a ancient thinker known as Rene Descartes who stated “Dubito ergo cogito, cogito ergo sum” translated as “I doubt therefore I think, I think therefore I am”.
The point is that just because we don’t have an explanation other than God for existence at the moment; that does not mean that there isn’t one. Even if millions of years from now we haven’t explained anything further, all that would prove is that our material knowledge of the Universe is not
However, these beliefs were eliminated with the Quran. The astrophysics believe that the universe cause into existence as a result of great explosion. This event is known as “the big bang” this theory describes that the earth was created as a result of the explosion (Rajabnejad, n.d.). Modern scientific circles agree that the big bang theory is the rational and provable explanation of the beginning of universe. Before that big bang there was no matter, energy.
A section of theists would also deny any relation to this theory because of its closer connection to the big bang theory. Through this essay, I aim to suggest for a balance between science