In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good.
The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.
From the rising of the sun to its setting, the name of the Lord is to be praised!
(Genesis 1:1, 16-18; Psalm 19:1; Psalm 113:3)
These are photographs I took at the moment of totality during the two total solar eclipses visible from North America in 2017 and 2024. With both eclipses, I was able to photograph the events from first contact, through totality, until last contact. The results were pretty stunning....at least to me.
From an experiential aspect, the majority of each event was comparatively unremarkable from the standpoint that I have seen and photographed a number of partial solar eclipses before that range from less than 40% to greater than 80% of coverage of the solar disc. The similar stages of obfuscation during the total eclipses were technically no different than those of partial eclipses.
The difference comes shortly before totality. When enough of the solar disc is obscured by the moon leaving a miniscule sliver of visible sun, the temperature is noticeably cooler, and the atmosphere begins to change. Area clouds begin to take on a strange appearance with the change of lighting, the sunlight around you takes on an unusual tint, and photosensor activated lights come on. It's then that a darkness like late dusk quickly overtakes you when your mind knows it should be full daylight. The horizon has a late-dusk glow, but the closer you look toward the sun's location, the darker the sky gets.
2024 Total Solar Eclipse with Venus visible
A Historical Perspective
There are a lot of myths and historical events linked with both lunar and solar eclipses. One such historical event of interest involves two giants in the worlds of physics and cosmology: Albert Einstein and Edwin Hubble.In 1915, Albert Einstein published his Theory of General Relativity, which was an update to his Theory of Special Relativity published in 1905. Einstein's theory suggested an expanding universe which implied the universe had a beginning.
Historical and conventional belief at that time, among both scientists and laity, was that the universe was static. A static universe means that the universe would be spatially and temporally infinite; it had always existed in a state without expansion or contraction and would always exist in that state.
Believing the universe was static, Einstein introduced what is referred to as the cosmological constant into his calculations and assigned it a definitive value. Such a calculational constant was needed in order to maintain the static constancy of the universe.
However, portions of Einstein's theory of General Relativity were met by some scientists with a bit of skepticism. His theory also predicted that rays of light would be visibly bent when passing near a massive body in space as they followed the curve in space-time created by that body’s mass. Einstein had calculated a deflection value of light from a distant star as the rays passed the edge of the sun.
In 1919, scientists took advantage of a total solar eclipse in an attempt to test Einstein's theory on the effect of gravity on light. Astronomers at various locations along the path of the eclipse photographed stars around the edges of the obscured sun during totality. They compared those photographs with photographs of the same sky field taken at night. After months of analysis, it was determined that the evidence supported Einstein's theory, and Einstein went from a relatively well known physicist to international celebrity status. His name has become a common byword to denote intelligence (or insultingly, a lack of).
Now it should be said that up to this time it was believed, even among scientists, that our Milky Way galaxy was synonymous with being the entire universe. While objects outside of the Milky Way were being discovered and observed for quite some time, it was debated whether the "spiral nebulae" were gas pockets within the Milky Way or somehow outside of it.
In 1923, astronomer Edwin Hubble (after whom the great space telescope was named) started using a newly commissioned 100 inch telescope at the Mount Wilson Observatory. Hubble studied these debated "spiral nebulae" and was able to discern individual stars in the Andromeda Nebula. In studying those stars, he discovered several that experienced regular periods of changes in their brightness over time. These were a particular type of known variable star. This type of variable star is known as a Cepheid variable star which has a strong relationship between their luminosity and their pulsation period. Their cyclical nature is so well-defined that they are used as benchmarks for measuring cosmic and galactic distances. Polaris, commonly known as "The North Star" in our own galaxy, is the nearest Cepheid variable star to earth.
By measuring the Andromeda Nebula's Cepheid variable periods and brightness to ascertain their distances, Hubble calculated their distance at over two million light years away. With this, he definitively proved the existence of galaxies outside of the Milky Way and that the Andromeda Nebula was in actuality the Andromeda Galaxy. By the end of the decade, astronomers began to believe that our galaxy was just one among millions of other galaxies in the universe.
In 1929, Hubble observed that the distant galaxies were moving away from the Milky Way. This discovery was based on their light waves in much the same way as the doppler effect with sound waves.
Unless you are hearing impaired, you have most likely encountered an automobile, a jet, a train, or some other sound-producing object approach you. Sound is emitted in audio waves. When you first hear it, it is a faint noise. As it approaches you, the pitch or tone of the sound increases. As the object recedes from you, the pitch or tone of the sound decreases.
Light waves behave in a similar fashion. You are familiar with the visible light color spectrum acronym of ROYGBIV, which translates to red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet. The wavelengths of light are longer toward the red end of the spectrum, and narrower toward the blue end of the spectrum. As light approaches you, the wavelength shortens (bluer, compressed, or blue-shifted), and as light recedes from you, the wavelength lengthens (redder, stretched, or red-shifted).
[A generalized representation]
Through his observations, measurements, and calculations, Hubble determined the distance of the galaxies he observed, that regardless of their direction in the sky they were moving away, and that their distance was directly proportional to their red-shift along the spectrum as observed from earth.
This means that the galaxies that were further from Earth were moving away faster and which lead to its logical conclusion that the universe was indeed expanding. Further logical reasoning lead to understanding that if the universe was expanding, looking backward in time the universe would have been smaller and smaller. That lead to the conclusion that the universe must have had a beginning sometime in the finite past.
In 1931, Einstein visited Hubble at the Mount Wilson Observatory and was convinced of Hubble's findings that the universe could not possibly be static. Einstein abandoned the forced cosmological constant value and would state that it was the biggest blunder of his career.
However, his theory of General Relativity really came into prominence with this new field of Cosmology and how space, time, matter, gravity, light, forces, particles, and everything else would behave and interact in the past, in the present, and in the future. This was thanks in part to the 1919 solar eclipse confirmation of gravity's effect on light.
By measuring the distance to the oldest stars and objects and determining their age by how long their light took to reach earth and by measuring the rate of the universe's expansion, scientists can extrapolate back to the Big Bang. By going backward in time, the universe is both younger and smaller until the point when it had expanded from a singular point at which space, time, and matter would have had their beginning.
Thus began the process of modelling how the universe began and produced the predominantly accepted theory referred to as the Big Bang model.
Positional Note
Many Christians differ on their belief of the age of the universe and the length of time for Creation. These issues are what are referred to as secondary doctrines. Unlike with essential doctrines, differing opinions regarding secondary doctrines should not break Christian fellowship. Tragically though, there are a number of Christians who make this topic a do-or-die doctrine and accuse those who hold opposing positions of disbelieving God and His word. (I address essential, secondary, and tertiary doctrines in the article, Counterfeits.)
You may be curious at this point on whether I believe in the cosmological Big Bang, in a Young Earth, or an Old Earth. From the material presented in this article, you may make assumptions, but I would remind you of the dangers of when you "assume". For now, since it is a secondary doctrine, I will withhold my belief. However, I will leave you with this thought that can speak for the various views from a Christian perspective: As apologist Frank Turek says, "I believe in the Big Bang. I just know Who 'Banged' it!"
A Christian Perspective
A syllogism is an argument formula utilizing deductive reasoning to arrive at a logical conclusion. It is presented with a primary premise and a secondary premise, and then follows with a logical conclusion based on the premises.
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is a syllogism promoted by philosopher and Christian apologist Dr. William Lane Craig and used in many of his creation debates. It flows like this:
Premise 1: Whatever begins to exist had a cause.Premise 2: The universe began to exist.Conclusion: Therefore, the universe had a cause.
Admittedly, it does not point the cause of the universe to the Christian God. That is not its intent. In a Quora discussion on why there can't be an infinite regress of causes, one gentlemen answering the question replied, in part:
You’re referring to the fallacy of the cosmological argument which states that some “god” had to have caused the universe to begin existing. The response to that is, if the universe required a creator because something couldn’t just come into being on its own, then who created the creator? Didn’t the creator come into being on its own? And if something created the creator, then what created that creator? And what created that creator, ad infinitum? So the cosmological argument solves that infinite regress by simply declaring that there was a first cause. The fallacy is that, whatever that first cause is, has been arbitrarily chosen for convenience, and not because it is factually or logically true.
[...]
So if you start your argument by saying “God created the universe, and nothing else created God,” you can’t prove your premise to be true, therefore your conclusion cannot be considered to be necessarily true, no matter how watertight the intermediate logic is.
While obviously not a theist, his full answer wasn't entirely wrong. As demonstrated by the Kalam argument, creation points toward the necessity of a cause, it doesn't identify the cause. Further arguments and evidences are required to ascertain what could possibly be the "first cause" of the origin of the universe to bring the conversation to that point.
Jews and Christians have for thousands of years held the belief of a beginning in which time, space, and matter came into simultaneous existence. For space, time, and matter to come into existence, whatever caused it to come into existence must itself be spaceless, timeless, and immaterial. A thing can neither create itself nor can it consist of, or be governed by, what it causes the absolute incipience of.
As penned in Genesis 1:
In the beginning (time),God (spaceless/timeless/immaterial and already existent)created the heavens (space)and the earth (matter).
Such a cause of the universe would have to be:
- Powerful in order to create the universe and everything in it
- Timeless in order to create time and put in place a framework for events to happen or objects to change state
- Spaceless in order to create space in which to contain matter
- Immaterial in order to create matter from nothing
- Intelligent in order to know how to create literally everything with such intricacy and variety
- Wise in order to create everything in a sustaining manner with extreme precision
- Personal in order to choose to bring everything into existence from an eternal state of nothingness to a state of somethingness. If a nonpersonal cause is eternal then its effect must also be eternal. Cause and Effect is a sequential and temporal relationship, and time was nonexistent.
In a dialogue debate between Dr. Craig and biologist Dr. Lewis Wolpert, Dr. Wolpert maintained the position of an inability to know if God exists and inability of providing evidence that a being created the universe. Sarcastically, he stated he believed it was done by a computer. In counterpoints to Dr. Craig's responses, he cheekily quipped such things as: it was a self-designing computer, it was a timeless computer, it was a special computer, it was a logically coherent computer, it was an amazing computer, it was a nonphysical computer. When you do such a thing as what Dr. Wolpert demonstrated, what you are in fact doing is simply assigning those attributes and a different name to what is commonly referred to as God.[1]
As presented above, some skeptics will ask, "Then what created God?"
If God had a cause, then whatever created God would be God instead. If that God had a cause, then whatever created that God would be God instead. And if that God had a cause, then whatever created that God would be God instead. And so on ad infinitum. This would fall into the fallacy of infinite regression of successive events in linear time. But because God is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial, nothing could precede Him in order to cause Him. In the creation debate world, this makes God the "uncaused first cause".
I am not a philosopher or a physicist, and this is a very heady and difficult topic. And like most heady and difficult topics there are philosophical and scholarly giants in the field that hold opposing views on this topic. Having listened to such learned individuals over several years, this is my best understanding of successive events inside of time.
Einstein's General Relativity showed that space and time are interwoven into a single continuum commonly referred to as space-time.
Let's imagine that you would read the following sentence at 09:15:42 tomorrow morning in our actual space-time reality that began with a definitive beginning of time. With a finite number of past successive events, the moment for your reading this sentence would occur. Some time after the Peloponnesian War, your great-grandparents met, you learned to read, and you eventually encountered this article during which you started reading the first word of that sentence. You continued to read that sentence with each successive word until its end. Each event would have a finite number of successive events before it, and the chain of events regress all the way back to the very beginning.
However, with an infinite amount of time, there could be no first beginning moment, no 00:00:00 mark, because there would still be an infinite amount of time prior to every moment you could possibly refer back to. If time was infinite, there would be an infinite amount of time and regressive events before you could read that sentence above, which means that your moment for reading that sentence, or this one, would never happen. In essence, no event would happen because its moment of occurrence would never be realized because of an infinite regression of prior successive events.
It brings to mind grade school when we learn the difference between a line, a ray and a segment. A segment is a line with both beginning and ending points so it is finite in length. A ray starts at a specific end-point and then continues from that point in a single direction for infinity. Lastly we are told a line, in theory, is a straight path on a plane that has no beginning and no end and stretches in opposing directions for infinity. In that aspect, it is like looking at a circle or a sphere and being asked to find where it begins or where it ends.
God, outside of time and before time existed and unaffected by time, simply is. This is why He revealed His name to Moses as I AM (in Hebrew, hāyâ), meaning "to be", "exist". As beings that are finite (having a beginning) and temporal, we can't wrap our heads around an eternal existence.
In rejection of an intelligent and eternal creator, many cosmologists propose a wide range of alternative ideas. One proposal redefines the meaning of the word "nothing" so that the pre-Big Bang "nothingness" contains fields and particles (which negates the literal and longstanding definition of "no thing"). Another model proposes multiple universes co-existing simultaneously or overlapping in time in which it just happens that the universe we are in was randomly generated so that all of its particles and forces work in ways and within value ranges to support life. Another similar model proposes that the universe is in an infinite cycle of expansion and contraction in which the expansion slows, then the universe collapses back onto itself, and then triggers another Big Bang to begin the cycle again and we just happen to be in a cycle that supports life. These theories either fail to answer logical questions, flaws, or fallacies, or they rely on extra-universal suppositions which can not be historically challenged, can not be observed, can not be tested, and certainly can not be duplicated.
Such proposals range from improbable or ridiculous to essentially being exercises of faith.
It seems to me that it is more logical to believe that the universe began to exist at a finite point in the past, instigated by an immensely powerful, unimaginably wise, incomprehensibly intelligent, timeless, spaceless, immaterial, but purposefully personal uncaused cause.
I'd call that uncaused cause ... "God", and then I'd learn who He is.
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
(Romans 1:20)
- - -
- - -
In 1948, scientists began predicting the evidential signature of what they referred to as background radiation (cosmic microwave background) from the moment of the Big Bang. It was first detected in 1965. The measured temperature of that radiation in every direction was uniform and provided further evidence of being residual of the Big Bang moment.
Posts
