What does it look like to watch a theory in crisis? Well, we’re lucky enough to be living through just such an event. Right now, many are beginning to openly question the Big Bang Theory (BBT). Perhaps you’ve heard the news that new images from the James Webb Space Telescope are putting serious strain on the BBT. Some like Eric Lerner are saying the Big Bang is busted. Others, however, are not only not willing to abandon the theory that has been central to scientific thinking for so very long.
I’m not a scientist. And I won’t pretend to parse the arguments and try to give you a scientific case on whether these images do or do not undermine or explode the BBT. But what I would like to do is draw your attention to some of the defenses made by science writers. You can read Lerner and his arguments against the Big Bang, but I think it’s just as instructive to read the criticism of his criticism.
Some serious scientists are saying, “sure, BBT has problems, but we don’t have enough evidence to disprove it, yet.” And most people would admit that that’s a perfectly reasonable thing for a very smart person to say. But then there are others. These aren’t scientists, as much as they are Scientismists. The are acolytes and clerics in the religion of Science. They promote Scientism, which is dogmatic religious fundamentalism, but from an atheistic, (usually) Darwinistic, perspective. Scientism and Science are related only in that they have confidence in empiricism and observation. They differ in that Science knows where its limitations are: it doesn’t make moral claims; it doesn’t make theological claims; it knows that it can never say anything “for sure”. Scientism does the opposite. It takes real science, and a good bit of fake science, and spins a narrative around it to create a religious worldview, with a clergy, liturgy, and creeds.
In one of the weakest arguments, one science writer said that, “The Big Bang theory is currently the best model we have for the birth of our universe.” First, a bad theory, even if it’s the best available, can still be criticized and even overthrown! Second, the writer concludes with this gem: “Scientific theories can -- and should -- be challenged by well-reasoned scientists presenting highly detailed and thoughtful arguments. This is not one of those times. And that means, despite the headlines, the Big Bang did happen.”
How did he make the epistemic leap from, “it’s the best available theory” to “it happened”? That’s an AWFULLY big leap. One might even call it a “leap of faith”!
And that’s what it was. Are there serious scientists who are not convinced that the Big Bang’s been busted? Sure. Are there a lot of charlatans and pseudo-scientists – Scientismists – who are whistling past the graveyard and telling us all to “move along, folks”? Sure.
Christians need to recognize that “Science” is always in flux. It’s always changing. Just because we no longer think it’s “turtles all the way down” doesn’t mean that our current “science” won’t be considered just as quaint and ludicrous in the future.
It’s crucial the Christians rest our faith in the Word of God. It’s crucial that we not build our lives on the sinking sand of science – or worse, Scientism! – but rather build our lives on Christ. All who put their hope in Science will be disappointed; those who put it in the Son, never will.