God and Nature Spring 2020
By Mario Russo
“Over the last fifty years, we have learned one thing about the relationship between science and faith: they have absolutely nothing to do with each other.” This was stated as a matter of fact—as if it was the most obvious thing in the world. The speaker was the head of the theology department at a university near where I live. He and I had been discussing the relationship between science and faith. He has an interest in this field and has published several essays in European journals. I had not expected him to take this position.
Ian Barbour calls this take the “Independence” view. It states that the knowledge we gain from science and the knowledge we gain from religion are independent from each other: these two sources of knowledge at no point overlap with each other. Each field has its own distinct rules and language. After Darwin popularized evolutionary theory, many took to this view as a way to accommodate certain interpretations of Genesis with evolutionary theory. Perhaps the most popular statement of this approach is by the late Harvard paleontologist and evolutionary biologist, Stephen J. Gould, who called science and religion “nonoverlapping magisteria,” or NOMA for short (1).
“Over the last fifty years, we have learned one thing about the relationship between science and faith: they have absolutely nothing to do with each other.” This was stated as a matter of fact—as if it was the most obvious thing in the world. The speaker was the head of the theology department at a university near where I live. He and I had been discussing the relationship between science and faith. He has an interest in this field and has published several essays in European journals. I had not expected him to take this position.
Ian Barbour calls this take the “Independence” view. It states that the knowledge we gain from science and the knowledge we gain from religion are independent from each other: these two sources of knowledge at no point overlap with each other. Each field has its own distinct rules and language. After Darwin popularized evolutionary theory, many took to this view as a way to accommodate certain interpretations of Genesis with evolutionary theory. Perhaps the most popular statement of this approach is by the late Harvard paleontologist and evolutionary biologist, Stephen J. Gould, who called science and religion “nonoverlapping magisteria,” or NOMA for short (1).
"If such transformation is possible for believers, it is only reasonable to conclude that it is also possible for the cosmos." |
However, what are we to do when the Bible and science do seem to make conflicting claims? When science claims one thing, and the Bible claims the opposite, we have a difficult decision to make. We cannot simply say that the two views are “independent” from each other. We must either accept one view and dismiss the other or resolve the conflict.
One such conflict has arisen between cosmology and eschatology. Cosmology claims the universe will end in one of several possible ways, each of which assumes the universe is moving continuously, though relatively slowly, toward some form of destruction. Biblical eschatology, on the other hand, makes the claim that the resurrection of Jesus has sent the world on a trajectory toward a new creation. “All things,” says Jesus in Revelation 21:5, are and will be made new. These conflicting claims create dissonance between science and theology over the ultimate fate of the universe.
Cosmic Claims
In one of its simplest forms, the big bang theory states that “the universe has expanded from an initially hot and dense state to its current relatively cool and tenuous state, and that the expansion is still going on today” (2). The big bang did not occur at a single point in space as an “explosion.” It is better thought of as the simultaneous and sudden appearance of time and space. After that, the process that eventually led to the emergence of life began. Atoms began arranging themselves into simple and then progressively more complex molecules, and the building blocks of life were formed.
Through evolution, life progressively changes. The term “progressive” here refers to the gradual accumulation of naturally selected traits that are passed on to subsequent generations. That progressive change continues to this day—but according to modern cosmology, there will eventually come an end to the universe, and thus an end to that progressive change.
How will the universe end? According to cosmologists, the universe may continually expand until it eventually recollapses on itself and ends in destruction. This is known as the “big crunch.” However, the universe could also be undergoing infinite expansion. In this case, it would continually expand and cool until it reaches a point of extreme cold known as the “big freeze.” With the discovery of dark energy and the increasing rate of the universe’s expansion, this view is currently seen as most likely to be correct. In this scenario, there would never be a future in which the universe ceases to exist, though life would become impossible and eventually even atoms would not hold together.
The Tension
If the universe never dies but continues to expand and cool, does that mean that there would never be a point in time when God could transform the present creation into the new creation? Jesus died prior to being raised from the dead. His post-resurrection body was transformed. But if the universe is never going to die, then when and how could God transform the universe?
If the universe were moving toward eventual death, the dissonance would be less complicated to resolve. After the physical death of the universe, the Holy Spirit could transform the cosmos into a renewed, glorified creation, thereby following a consistent pattern of origin, progress, and physical death that is followed by renewal. However, if the universe remains in a state of infinite expansion, there is no point of death at which transformation from present creation to new creation can occur. How does something infinite experience death and become transformed into something new? In order to answer this question, we must look through a Christian redemptive lens.
A Theological Lens
We speak of a Christian life when a person, by grace and through faith, experiences a sudden re-birth called regeneration. That person is a new creation on the basis of Christ’s work on the cross and his resurrection (2 Cor 5:17). The new Christian then spends his or her life living by faith and becoming, in actuality, progressively more righteous. Believers thus become what they have been declared to be. They die a physical death in the hope of a final resurrection and glorification in which they attain a new creation state. There is a pattern of sudden spiritual recreation in the life of a person that is then followed by a gradual process of change, a physical death, and final glorification.
The pattern of origin, development, and destination is a helpful lens. Regeneration (origin), the instantaneous transformation from spiritual death to spiritual life, is the starting point of spiritual resurrection. This sudden burst of spiritual life echoes the sudden big bang beginning of the cosmos. Sanctification (development) is the progress of transformation from the old into the new, mirroring the evolution of the cosmos. Glorification (destination) is the final state of full transformation. This is not only the destination of those who have faith in Christ, but also the destination of the entire physical cosmos.
The cosmos is currently experiencing transformation prior to its glorified state of renewal as new creation. This means it is possible that there is no single “death event” for the cosmos.
Just as the Holy Spirit progressively moves a believer’s “already” toward the glorified “not yet” of perfection, the Holy Spirit is moving the “already” of the universe toward the “not yet” of new creation. If the universe is an open system, such progressive renewal of creation by the Holy Spirit would eventually bring it into a renewed state without experiencing death.
There is biblical precedent for transformation without a death event. In the Old Testament, men such as Enoch and Elijah were taken up into Heaven without dying. In the New Testament, the apostle Paul says: “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:51-52). Believers who are alive at the return of Christ will not experience death, but will experience, undoubtedly by the power of the Holy Spirit, new creation transformation. They would go through a progressive transformation by the Holy Spirit, and then a final new creation transformation without a death event.
If such transformation is possible for believers, it is only reasonable to conclude that it is also possible for the cosmos. Believers alive at the return of Christ are instantaneously transformed. Similarly, the cosmos will be instantaneously transformed into new creation.
Conclusion
The claims of cosmology and eschatology concerning the destination of the universe, though different, are not incompatible. Rather, they are telling two versions of the same story. Comparing the history and workings of the natural cosmos with the broader Christian redemptive narrative reveals a natural process of creation that is similar to the spiritual process of creation. Since both cosmology and redemption have similar origin and development narratives, it stands to reason that they have a similar destination: new creation. Thus, by using a redemptive lens, Christian theology brings harmony to the dissonance between cosmology and eschatology.
References
1. Stephen Jay Gould, "Nonoverlapping Magisteria," Natural History 106 (March 1997): pp. 16-22; Also reprinted in Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms, New York: Harmony Books, 1998, pp. 269-283.
2. Barbara Ryden, Introduction to Cosmology, 2nd ed., Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2017, p. 5.
Mario A. Russo is the Director of the Dortmund Center for Science and Faith. He earned a Doctor of Ministry from Erskine College and Seminary, a Master of Arts Religion from Reformed Theological Seminary, and an Interdisciplinary Bachelor of Science degree in Biology and Psychology from the University of South Carolina. He has written and spoken on various platforms about issues related to science and faith for over 15 years. He lives in Dortmund, Germany along with his wife and 2 children.
One such conflict has arisen between cosmology and eschatology. Cosmology claims the universe will end in one of several possible ways, each of which assumes the universe is moving continuously, though relatively slowly, toward some form of destruction. Biblical eschatology, on the other hand, makes the claim that the resurrection of Jesus has sent the world on a trajectory toward a new creation. “All things,” says Jesus in Revelation 21:5, are and will be made new. These conflicting claims create dissonance between science and theology over the ultimate fate of the universe.
Cosmic Claims
In one of its simplest forms, the big bang theory states that “the universe has expanded from an initially hot and dense state to its current relatively cool and tenuous state, and that the expansion is still going on today” (2). The big bang did not occur at a single point in space as an “explosion.” It is better thought of as the simultaneous and sudden appearance of time and space. After that, the process that eventually led to the emergence of life began. Atoms began arranging themselves into simple and then progressively more complex molecules, and the building blocks of life were formed.
Through evolution, life progressively changes. The term “progressive” here refers to the gradual accumulation of naturally selected traits that are passed on to subsequent generations. That progressive change continues to this day—but according to modern cosmology, there will eventually come an end to the universe, and thus an end to that progressive change.
How will the universe end? According to cosmologists, the universe may continually expand until it eventually recollapses on itself and ends in destruction. This is known as the “big crunch.” However, the universe could also be undergoing infinite expansion. In this case, it would continually expand and cool until it reaches a point of extreme cold known as the “big freeze.” With the discovery of dark energy and the increasing rate of the universe’s expansion, this view is currently seen as most likely to be correct. In this scenario, there would never be a future in which the universe ceases to exist, though life would become impossible and eventually even atoms would not hold together.
The Tension
If the universe never dies but continues to expand and cool, does that mean that there would never be a point in time when God could transform the present creation into the new creation? Jesus died prior to being raised from the dead. His post-resurrection body was transformed. But if the universe is never going to die, then when and how could God transform the universe?
If the universe were moving toward eventual death, the dissonance would be less complicated to resolve. After the physical death of the universe, the Holy Spirit could transform the cosmos into a renewed, glorified creation, thereby following a consistent pattern of origin, progress, and physical death that is followed by renewal. However, if the universe remains in a state of infinite expansion, there is no point of death at which transformation from present creation to new creation can occur. How does something infinite experience death and become transformed into something new? In order to answer this question, we must look through a Christian redemptive lens.
A Theological Lens
We speak of a Christian life when a person, by grace and through faith, experiences a sudden re-birth called regeneration. That person is a new creation on the basis of Christ’s work on the cross and his resurrection (2 Cor 5:17). The new Christian then spends his or her life living by faith and becoming, in actuality, progressively more righteous. Believers thus become what they have been declared to be. They die a physical death in the hope of a final resurrection and glorification in which they attain a new creation state. There is a pattern of sudden spiritual recreation in the life of a person that is then followed by a gradual process of change, a physical death, and final glorification.
The pattern of origin, development, and destination is a helpful lens. Regeneration (origin), the instantaneous transformation from spiritual death to spiritual life, is the starting point of spiritual resurrection. This sudden burst of spiritual life echoes the sudden big bang beginning of the cosmos. Sanctification (development) is the progress of transformation from the old into the new, mirroring the evolution of the cosmos. Glorification (destination) is the final state of full transformation. This is not only the destination of those who have faith in Christ, but also the destination of the entire physical cosmos.
The cosmos is currently experiencing transformation prior to its glorified state of renewal as new creation. This means it is possible that there is no single “death event” for the cosmos.
Just as the Holy Spirit progressively moves a believer’s “already” toward the glorified “not yet” of perfection, the Holy Spirit is moving the “already” of the universe toward the “not yet” of new creation. If the universe is an open system, such progressive renewal of creation by the Holy Spirit would eventually bring it into a renewed state without experiencing death.
There is biblical precedent for transformation without a death event. In the Old Testament, men such as Enoch and Elijah were taken up into Heaven without dying. In the New Testament, the apostle Paul says: “Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed—in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed” (1 Corinthians 15:51-52). Believers who are alive at the return of Christ will not experience death, but will experience, undoubtedly by the power of the Holy Spirit, new creation transformation. They would go through a progressive transformation by the Holy Spirit, and then a final new creation transformation without a death event.
If such transformation is possible for believers, it is only reasonable to conclude that it is also possible for the cosmos. Believers alive at the return of Christ are instantaneously transformed. Similarly, the cosmos will be instantaneously transformed into new creation.
Conclusion
The claims of cosmology and eschatology concerning the destination of the universe, though different, are not incompatible. Rather, they are telling two versions of the same story. Comparing the history and workings of the natural cosmos with the broader Christian redemptive narrative reveals a natural process of creation that is similar to the spiritual process of creation. Since both cosmology and redemption have similar origin and development narratives, it stands to reason that they have a similar destination: new creation. Thus, by using a redemptive lens, Christian theology brings harmony to the dissonance between cosmology and eschatology.
References
1. Stephen Jay Gould, "Nonoverlapping Magisteria," Natural History 106 (March 1997): pp. 16-22; Also reprinted in Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms, New York: Harmony Books, 1998, pp. 269-283.
2. Barbara Ryden, Introduction to Cosmology, 2nd ed., Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2017, p. 5.
Mario A. Russo is the Director of the Dortmund Center for Science and Faith. He earned a Doctor of Ministry from Erskine College and Seminary, a Master of Arts Religion from Reformed Theological Seminary, and an Interdisciplinary Bachelor of Science degree in Biology and Psychology from the University of South Carolina. He has written and spoken on various platforms about issues related to science and faith for over 15 years. He lives in Dortmund, Germany along with his wife and 2 children.