Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1. What do you think of the cosmological argument in the light of the history of the universe?
Are they additive or opposing theories?
The cosmological argument, in my opinion, is an additive theory to the existence of the being
that is the cause of the entire series of beings. The cosmological argument for God's presence
will persist in the request for topics or look at why topics are how they are to expose God's
presence. The existence of the universe seeks an explanation, as it could not have arisen from
now. The universe should have a reason for existing. Because nothing comes from nothing, there
may be a few elements that have more than likely been some exceptional few elements that are
its motivation. Aristotle rejects the need for a First Cause as the result of a significant movement
of causes.
2. What are the Genesis creation stories about? Do the Genesis creation stories contradict
directly the story of the Big Bang? If yes, which one is more credible? If no, why not?
Genesis tells the story of God's first work, creation, which outlines the way for all subsequent
work. The book of Genesis asserts that God created the universe, but it does not explain how.
Scientists try to understand how things happen in the world as we see them. According to Pope
Francis, the big bang theory, which states that the universe began 13.7 billion years ago, and the
idea that life evolved through evolution does not contradict Catholic teaching. Evolution does not
contradict the concept of creation in nature because evolution necessitates the creation of the
beings that evolve. Both stories are credible; it is simply a matter of belief about whether God or
the Big Bang theory created the universe. To believe in Creation, all you need is faith. But it
takes more faith to believe that something as beautiful and perfect as our Solar System happened
by chance.
