Religion and science - origins

“It’s all a question of origins”


The origins of the world have always been a debateable topic with many different views and many sides of the argument. The origins of the world have been argued yet still people cannot come to a final conclusion. Some of these views are explained below.

Scientific ideas  

Many people believe in science being the source of the origin of the earth and the rest of the world. Man has always tried to look for the answers for everything independently. Now when the origins of the world are being questioned, humans have got science to get an answer; the big bang. If the big bang theory is scientifically proven then why doesn’t everyone believe in it?

Almost all atheists in a recent survey said that they believed that the big bang theory was correct because it was something that they could relate to unlike God. They said “we can’t imagine what God did to make the world, was it like magic and it just came there.”

The big bang suggests that the world was made from lots of energy starting a big bang this created the first matter. This matter, which was hydrogen, began to compress to produce helium. Some of this matter would become so dense it would ignite and become a star this would create many other elements. When some stars died it created a nova, this used up fuel was normally the source of the planets. Our solar system was made when the sun crashed into a nova. This flung all the different elements at different locations to produce planets.

I don’t agree with this view because the big bang doesn’t say how life was formed. Many people say we were made because all the elements that we are made from are present but what actually made these elements come to life? What made things live? I don’t think that the big bang answers this question.

Religious ideas

The Koran says that if Allah says “be” it is created. The Koran describes how Allah created the world and the heavens and how he made all creatures swim, fly, walk or crawl on the face of the earth. He made the angels the sun the stars and the universe. Allah poured the rain and broke up the ground to bring the corn and the grapes and all other vegetations. He then ordered the angels to bring him lots of soil so he could make man. Allah then made man and women and called them Adam and Eve he made them take care of the animals.

A recent counter argument to this from atheists was that if Allah says ‘be’ and it is created why did he need soil for the creation of man? A recent Islamic belief is that God created the big bang. This ties in both ideas about science and religion however not all Muslims believe this.

The Hindu’s view suggests that the before time began there was nothing except for water (similar to the Christian view) and Lord Vishnu lay on this water with a giant cobra.

With lots of energy Vishnu awoke (this is a link to the big bang as it started with energy). From Lord Vishnu’s navel grew a big lotus flower and in the middle was Brahma the God of creation. Vishnu told Brahman to create the world.

Vishnu then disappeared but Brahma began to create the world. He split the lotus flower into three making one the heavens, one the earth and one the skies.

At this time the earth was bare so Brahma set to work. He created
Plants of all kinds and gave them feeling. Next he created the animals and the insects to live on the land. He made birds to fly in the air and many fish to swim in the sea. To all these creatures, he gave the senses of touch, smell and sight and allowed them to move.

This account shows the religious side as the world was made by a God in this case Vishnu and also the scientific side as it says how the world was made with lots of energy during the awakening of Vishnu to create the world.

My own view

I am a devout Christian and agree with the Christian views, as it seems the easiest to relate to. I can’t imagine the world being created from a big bang. How does the world look so beautiful? It can’t be the product of an explosion. I think that the Islamic view is ok as it does show that the world was definitely made from God and I agree with some of its aspects. I am sure that the world was made by a God as there is no way that the world could have been made by anything else. How did energy produce life? Does a bang just suddenly produce nothing into something? With the Hindu’s view I can understand how they believe that God made the world, which I agree with but an interesting thing is that they include the point of energy which suggests that it has some concurrence with the big bang theory.

As a Christian I believe that God made the world by making it in days with water just being there all the time. On the first day he separated the light from the darkness and called the light day and the darkness night. On the second day he made an expanse to separate water from water. He called the expanse sky. On the third day he gathered the water to one place and dry ground appeared he called the ground land and the water sea. He made the land produce vegetation. With trees that bare fruit. On the fourth day God made the sun to govern the day and the moon to govern the night he also made the stars. On the fifth day God made the sea creatures to roam the seas and the birds to roam the skies. He was pleased with it. On the sixth day God created living creatures to live on the land. He made all sorts of creatures. He then made in an image of himself man so that they could rule over all the earth, and over all the creatures. He created both male and female and he blessed them. On the seventh day he rested. This is a controversial view, as it doesn’t agree with many things to do with science. However it does say how the world was created. And it suggests that God made it; which I think is the most important thing.

Many of the atheists that I know and have asked say that the creation story from the Islam, Hinduism and Christianity are too farfetched and they can’t relate to them, as they can’t understand what God did to make the world. But I think that it is the only solution for the creation of the world it is the only answer and I don’t see why anyone can think otherwise.

I believe that the big bang theory is not fully correct. I don’t think that a bang suddenly created the world. What caused the big bang? Why is it that life was made? I think that the big bang is not the correct answer. I think that there must be a God, but people try to be independent so they use science to get their answer. I think that we have the freedom to choose how the world was made and this means there will be a number of conflicting ideas.


Everyone has the right to chose what they want but really why would you believe that we everything around us is a product of a bang. If we are a product of a big bang there must have been some sort of external influence (God) that caused us to exist. I understand how people believe in the big bang yet I don’t understand how they don’t believe in God.

Popular posts from this blog

The inspector calls and how it relates to biblical parables.

The Parable of the Sower, The Good Samaritan, The Prodigal Son The Parable Of The Sower There was a farmer who went to sow some corn. He scattered the seeds in the field and the seeds fell in various places. Some of the seed fell on the path where it was eaten by birds and stepped on. Some of the seed fell on rocky ground, and the plants sprouted but dried up because the soil had no moisture. Some of the seed fell in a thorn bush and grew up but were choked by the thorns. Lastly some seed fell on good soil and the plants grew and produced lots of grains. Jesus then explains the parable and says: The seeds that fell on the path represent those who hear, but the devil comes and takes the message from the hearts and stops them from being saved. The seeds that fell on the rocky ground represent the people who except gods message gladly but it doesn’t sink in and when there faith is on the line they fade away The seeds that fall among thorn
Read more

How does Priestley convey his message in An Inspector Calls?

Being a co-founder of the Socialist Commonwealth Party, Priestley felt that his political views on socialism were very important and these views are displayed prominently throughout An Inspector Calls. Priestley uses characters to represent the different generations and also uses the Inspector as a mouthpiece to distribute his views; several critics describe the Inspector as Priestley’s alter ego. The Inspector conveys Priestley’s most important message, that a change in society’s attitude is required. Through Sheila’s words, “of course he knows. And I hate to think how much he knows that we don’t already know yet” we can see that the Inspector is believed to be an omniscient presence. He speaks as if he is divine by referring to the people as men and during his last speech he says, “If men will not learn that lesson, they will be taught it in fire and blood and anguish.” These words are influenced by Priestley’s own experiences fighting in the First World War. Portraying the Inspec
Read more

Tybalt is to blame for this tragedy - Romeo and Juliet Essay

“Tybalt is to blame for this tragedy” discuss with reference to Act 3 Scene 1 On one hand, Tybalt is heavily involved in the build up to the tragedy in Romeo and Juliet; Shakespeare portrays him as a villainous character who is the cause of several deaths and misfortune. Throughout the play Shakespeare exposes Tybalt’s violent nature and his anger is particularly shown, when Tybalt confronts Romeo and insults him in Act 3 Scene 1 saying, ‘thou art a villain’. This, in the Elizabethan period was very insulting and shows how quick Tybalt is to start fights, proving that he is hot-tempered. Critics argue that Tybalt caused the tragedy as he encourages a brawl by inviting Romeo to ‘turn and draw’. Had Tybalt not said this, Mercutio would probably not have been provoked to fight and consequently die. As a result of Mercutio’s death, Romeo killed Tybalt, forcing Romeo to leave. This led to a chain of disastrous events resulting in Romeo’s, Juliet’s and Paris’ deaths. It can also be argu
Read more

The Mayor of Casterbridge - Why is the ring at Casterbridge a suitable place for Henchard to meet Susan?

Why is the ring at Casterbridge a suitable place for Henchard to meet Susan? There are a number of reasons why the Ring could be considered a suitable place for Henchard to meet Susan. Firstly, Hardy makes it clear the Ring is not a place of happiness. It is described as a Roman amphitheatre in the heart of Casterbridge where no joy can be found, even for boys who tried to play cricket in it. He even accounts the story of a woman who murdered her husband being put at the stake in the Ring. This could suggest the Ring was a suitable place for the meeting as just as an evil woman was put to rest in the Ring, so will Henchard’s terrible and disgraceful mistake. As the Mayor of Casterbridge, Henchard is considered as a very respectable man and it would greatly damage his reputation if people discovered he had sold his wife and child. This is another reason the Ring was such a suitable place for the couple to meet as it is the “spot as being safest from observation which he cou
Read more

How does a river change along its course?

Image
Geography essay: how does a river change along its course? A river through the time that it exists changes its course from how it first began. The two parts of the river is the upper course and the lower course. These two parts of the river have very varied properties and do opposite things. Before finding out how a river changes on its course we must first know what a river does. Rivers do three main things: ·          Erosion (when water hits rocks and makes it wear away into silt) ·          Transportion (when the current of the water takes the silt with it) ·          Deposition (when the water leaves the silt behind) These things can be shown in a simple diagram: Erosion varies in the two courses. In the upper coarse vertical erosion takes place. In the lower coarse lateral erosion takes place. Other features of the upper and lower coarse are: ·          Small streams (upper) ·          Slow current (upper) ·          Mostly straight (upper) ·        
Read more

Why George R.R. Martin Reigns Supreme Over J.R.R. Tolkien

When it comes to the world of epic fantasy literature, two names stand out: George R.R. Martin and J.R.R. Tolkien. Both authors have captivated readers with their immersive worlds and richly crafted characters, but when it comes to comparing the two, George R.R. Martin undeniably takes the throne as the superior storyteller. One of the reasons why Martin surpasses Tolkien is his realistic and complex portrayal of human nature. Martin's characters are flawed, multi-dimensional, and morally ambiguous, making them relatable and compelling. He doesn't shy away from depicting the darker aspects of human behavior, such as political intrigue, betrayal, and the consequences of power struggles. In contrast, Tolkien's characters tend to be more archetypal, with clear-cut divisions between good and evil, and less depth in their motivations and actions. Furthermore, Martin's world-building is unparalleled in its intricacy and detail. The fictional realm of Westeros in his "A S
Read more