top of page
Writer's pictureWesley Jacob

Eternal God or Eternal Matter? An Examination of Cosmological Origins in Theological and Scientific Discourse

Updated: 6 days ago

The inquiry into the universe’s ultimate origin presents a profound crossroads between theology and cosmology, necessitating an epistemological and metaphysical choice between two paradigms: the belief in an eternal, transcendent God who creates ex nihilo and the belief in eternal matter or energy, a concept often posited within naturalistic cosmology. This dichotomy invites rigorous scrutiny, especially in light of recent advancements in cosmological understanding, such as the Big Bang theory and the cutting-edge observational capabilities of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). These developments challenge long-standing assumptions in both cosmological models and theological discourse, provoking deeper reflections on creation, temporality, and the metaphysical implications of “nothingness.” This essay critically examines the implications of eternal matter or energy as posited by contemporary cosmological models and contrasts these with the Christian doctrine of an eternal God as the sole creator of the cosmos.


The Problem of Eternal Matter in Contemporary Cosmological Models

The Big Bang theory, which posits that the universe began approximately 13.8 billion years ago from a singularity, represents a dominant model in modern cosmology. However, recent data from the JWST have prompted significant refinements to this framework. For instance, the JWST has detected galaxies that formed merely a few hundred million years after the Big Bang, challenging existing models of cosmic evolution and prompting cosmologists to reconsider the pre-Big Bang conditions. The implications of these observations raise fundamental questions regarding the nature of reality prior to the Big Bang, with hypotheses emerging around quantum vacuums and pre-existing physical states.

The notion of a quantum vacuum preceding the Big Bang presents a profound metaphysical quandary, particularly in its challenge to classical theism. Quantum vacuums represent energy states rather than “nothing”; thus, they suggest that the universe may have emerged from a pre-existing reality. This contradicts the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. Moreover, empirical observations, such as cosmic background radiation, lend credence to the idea that the universe was never truly empty, thereby reinforcing the existence of an eternal substrate—be it energy, quantum fields, or physical laws—that existed before the universe’s expansion.

The implications of these models, which imply an eternal metaphysical structure prior to the Big Bang, directly challenge the Christian theology’s conception of divine creation. In traditional Christian doctrine, as affirmed in classical theism, only God is eternal, and everything else, including the material universe, is contingent upon divine volition. The notion of eternal matter or energy introduces a form of self-existence that appears independent of God’s creative act, calling into question the doctrine of divine omnipotence and the radical contingency of creation.


Theological Implications: Eternal God or Eternal Radiation?

The hypothesis of eternal quantum fields or radiation strikes at the core of the Christian doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. According to the biblical account in Genesis and subsequent theological formulations, God brought forth the universe from absolute nothingness, without reliance on any pre-existing material. The Nicene Creed’s affirmation of God as the “Maker of heaven and earth” enshrines this belief, establishing a fundamental ontological distinction between the Creator and the created order. The emergence of cosmological models that posit an eternal substrate of radiation or energy introduces a substantial theological tension: it challenges the unique divine eternality and suggests that the cosmos possesses self-existence, a trait traditionally ascribed only to God.

The implications of an eternal physical substrate are particularly troubling within the context of Christian metaphysics, which maintains that all contingent existence—whether temporal or spatial—derives its being from the divine will. To assert that matter or energy is eternal implies a necessary existence independent of God’s creative agency, an idea that effectively nullifies the radical contingency central to Christian theism. If the universe, or some aspect of it, exists necessarily, it undermines the theistic assertion that everything in creation is fundamentally dependent upon God for its being and sustenance.


The Immaterial Laws of Physics and the Limits of Naturalism

A critical challenge to naturalistic cosmology is the existence of immaterial laws of physics, which govern the universe yet are not themselves material. Laws such as gravity, electromagnetism, and quantum mechanics exhibit consistency and universality; however, they do not occupy space, possess mass, or operate as physical entities. These immaterial laws raise serious metaphysical questions within a naturalistic framework: How can non-physical laws exist and govern physical reality? Furthermore, why do these laws remain constant over time, especially if the universe emerged from random, unguided processes?

Naturalism, which posits that the universe is the product of chance or necessity, struggles to account for the consistency of these laws. If the universe emerged from random processes, there is no compelling reason why the laws governing its development should be fixed or reliable. This epistemological challenge undermines the naturalistic worldview, which relies on the constancy of these laws for both explanatory coherence and predictive power. The inability of naturalism to account for the immateriality and consistency of the laws of physics reveals a significant limitation in its explanatory scope.

Conversely, Christian theism provides a coherent metaphysical explanation for the existence and reliability of these laws. Within the Christian worldview, the laws of nature are understood as reflections of God’s rational and immutable nature. They are sustained by God, who, as an unchanging and eternal being, ensures their order and consistency. The Apostle Paul encapsulates this idea in Romans 1:20, noting that “God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made.” The intelligibility and regularity of the cosmos, which naturalism cannot fully explain, are comprehensible within the theistic framework, wherein the laws of nature are sustained by a rational Creator.


Latest Discoveries: Insights from the James Webb Space Telescope

The JWST has provided critical insights into the early universe, complicating previous models of cosmic origins. The detection of galaxies that existed merely a few hundred million years after the Big Bang suggests that galaxy formation occurred more rapidly than previously understood. These discoveries have prompted cosmologists to reconsider the timeline and mechanisms of early cosmic development. Some scholars, such as Rogier Windhorst et al., argue that JWST’s data reveal a more intricate structure of cosmic dawn, wherein early star formation and galactic assembly may have occurred in ways not fully anticipated by current models.

These groundbreaking discoveries emphasize the limitations of naturalistic cosmology in explaining the universe’s origins. The deeper cosmological questions—whether there is a transcendent cause for the universe and whether the universe is contingent or self-existent—remain unresolved within the confines of empirical science. As observational technology advances, the data collected only complicate the timeline of cosmic origins, reinforcing the necessity of metaphysical reflection alongside scientific inquiry.


Conclusion: A Clash of Worldviews

The choice between belief in an eternal God and belief in eternal matter or energy represents a fundamental conflict between two worldviews. Naturalistic cosmology, which posits an eternal or self-sustaining universe, stands in stark opposition to Christian theism, which asserts that the universe is contingent upon an eternal, transcendent Creator. Attempts to reconcile these views, particularly in light of emerging data from the JWST, often produce unresolved tensions, as they import naturalistic assumptions incompatible with the theological framework of creatio ex nihilo.

Ultimately, while scientific discoveries continue to advance our understanding of the universe’s physical development, they do not—and cannot—resolve the profound metaphysical question of whether the universe is eternal or contingent upon an eternal Creator. Christian theology offers a coherent and philosophically robust account of the universe’s origins, upholding the distinction between the Creator and the created order and affirming the contingency of the cosmos. In contrast, naturalism falters in explaining the immaterial laws that govern the universe and the contingency of its existence, revealing the limits of a worldview that excludes divine agency.


Bibliography

1. Barrow, John D., and Frank J. Tipler. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.

2. Craig, William Lane, and Quentin Smith. Theism, Atheism, and Big Bang Cosmology. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.

3. Davies, Paul. The Goldilocks Enigma: Why Is the Universe Just Right for Life? Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006.

4. Hawking, Stephen. A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. New York: Bantam Books, 1988.

5. Swinburne, Richard. The Existence of God. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004.

6. Windhorst, Rogier, et al. “The Early Galaxies in the James Webb Space Telescope: A New Look at Cosmic Dawn.” Astronomical Journal 166, no. 2 (2024).




Comentários


bottom of page