God, Theory of evolution & The Big Bang Theory

how it all began

Curious minds would have thought about the origin of life how did life get started, why Im I
here, where am I going, why is there something rather than nothing, if nothing existed then
we will not be here to contemplate the issue and would have never thought, how did the
universe begin what caused it and why, why did it come into existence at that particular time
and what was the original cause, how did life on earth get started, were we part of an
evolutionary process beginning with self-replicating cells, or did we have a created ancestor
which was created and placed on earth, or is there any other unexplored option.
These are difficult questions which religion, science, and philosophy have attempted to
answer with conflicting and on par ideologies floating about, a topic they argue about so
passionately with each having their own group of followers. In trying to answer some of the
above mentioned questions humans have come up with two very popular theories in our
contemporary times. The candidates are the theory of evolution, and the big bang theory,
these theories being limited by material science stop at what is material while religion goes
further with the metaphysical. Its important to look at these questions with an unbiased mind
in order to have the best chance of recognising what is already a difficult question, by
keeping the emotions in check while opening the mind and sticking to facts, reason, and
wisdom. Many people have ideologies and a school of thought based on the institute they
studied at, or the religion & culture they were brought up in absorbing the information like a
sponge while not questioning their ideologies, rather defending their dogmatic principles at
all cost regardless of the fact whether what theyve been indoctrinated with stands correct or
incorrect. For such people truth rarely reaches them, and they must increase themselves in
deceitful thoughts in order to protect their original false ideologies.
The best answer we currently know regarding how the universe began is the Big Bang theory
which replaces the older Steady State theory when scientist thought the universe was eternal.
Why the Big Bang happened at that particular time measured by scientist to roughly around
13.8 billion years ago, what caused the bang to go off, and what was before the Big Bang
remains a mystery to us which can only be speculated about. Some scientist have said that
nothing existed prior to the Big Bang which begs the question which will be covered later in
this writing of how then did the universe come out of nothing. If nothing existed then nothing
will create or cause which defines logic and science, unless you do what another group of
scientist have done and redefine or use a different version of the meaning of nothing, but for
nothing I will remain with the not anything definition. Concept of nothing that we take for
granted in our life as merely a word to be used in language when thought about in detail
boggles the mind. Nothing is something that cannot be understood by science as nothing is
what existed before the beginning of the Big Bang meaning before the laws of physics which
of course initiated with the commencement of the Big Bang. Nothing is a concept more for
the theologians and philosophers to answer then for the scientist who study what has already
been created and could be measured.

What we do know however is that many things went right from the beginning of the big bang
until know so that there may be life on Earth. The amount of events that had to occur for life
to exist today are so high that it is almost impossible to have occurred by chance. This
concept is also known as intelligent design and is a disputed concept amongst people.
Opponents of intelligent design will confidently make the claim that the entire universe and
the complexity of living organisms which just about all theist and atheist agree on their
extreme complexity, have according to atheist all come about by mere chance, and chance
alone as opposed to the if there is a structure, a process occurring, and something rather than
nothing then their must surly have been a designer, creator, and originator. If the universe had
come into existence from nothing with no creator, a concept which cannot be explained and
makes no sense, then life as we know it would have no purpose, we live for a short time and
then go into non-existence for eternity a sad and depressing end awaits us. One would
eventually while trying to uphold good morals & ethics eventually think, why do I put other
people before me and take care of them more than I do for myself when there will be no
accountability rather only material gain for oneself. Hence chaos begins and as we see the
corruption in this life people live as though they have gotten away with their immorality and
viscous crimes against humanity, there will be no judgment as long as they are above the law
in this life. On the other hand if the universe had been created by God, then most certainly we
have a purpose and we understand that we will be held accountable for our actions as this was
not all created in vain.

We did not create the sky and the earth and whatever is between them in vain. That is a
conjecture of the faithless. So woe to the faithless for the Fire! (38:27)

Shall we treat those who have faith and do righteous deeds like those who cause corruption
on the earth? Shall we treat the Godwary like the vicious? (38:28)

In describing how vast the universe is limited to our extremely limited knowledge the
physicist Paul Davies in his book the Goldilocks Enigma writes.
Our sun is one among hundreds of billions of stars that make up the Milky Way galaxy, and
the Milky Way is in turn just one among hundreds of billions of galaxies scattered through
space to the limits of our instruments. The gaps between stars are so large that astronomers
measure them in light- years - the distance light travels in one year. One light-year works out
to be about 6 trillion miles, or 10 trillion kilometres. To put this into perspective, the moon is
just over a light-second away, and the sun a little more than 8 light-minutes. The Milky way,
which is a typical spiral galaxy, measure about 100,000 light-years across. The Andromeda
galaxy, a near neighbour of the Milky Way, lies at a distance of about 2.5 million light years.
The farthest galaxies imaged by the Hubble Space Telescope are over 100 billion light-years
away. In human term, the universe is almost unimaginably vast.

In regards to the topic if this entire universe has come into existence by mere chance or has
been created, Ayatullah Muhammad Taqi Misbah Yazdi says in his book theological
instructions.
Is it not an absurd idea that an encyclopaedia of a hundred volumes could have come into
existence as an effect of an explosion which came to occur in a metal mine, the fragments of
which took the form of letters and through accidental encounters with pieces of paper made
writing appear and then the papers also accidentally became arranged and bound into
volumes? To accept blind accidents as a means of explaining the vast universe as a
phenomenon, with all the hidden and uncovered secrets and wisdoms behind it is a thousand
times more absurd than the above-mentioned idea
He later on after further explanation says contemplating on these simple, visible, and clear
signs is sufficient enough for pure and uncontaminated hearts.
We usually think of causes as preceding their effect, so the question remains how something
came into existence out of nothing, a satisfactory answer could be and its the only one which
makes sense is that the new entity must arise somehow from an earlier different entity not
bound by the laws of physics, for example space-time or the laws of physics only started with
the big bang. Contemplating this question will always lead to a chain of explanation which
will eventually lead to something eternal requiring it to have no beginning and no end also
known as the (necessary existent). The only logical answer is the original cause and creator of
the universe must be beyond the laws of physics, space time, and matter, he must have been
the first of the first existing when there was nothing, and will be the last of the last existing
after everything. Putting it simply being eternal having no beginning and no end. Eternity and
infinity boggles the human mind and is something that we cannot comprehensively
comprehend due to our limited knowledge, the origin cause of all of creation whether it is the
single Big Bang or the multiverse (many universes) or whichever new theory we come up
with in future to replace contemporary theories, like how we replaced the Steady State theory
with the Big Bang one must at the end of the day conceive no matter how much it
overwhelms the mind that the original cause must be eternal, and thanks to the revelation of
religion we know that it is God who is eternal and created the heavens and the earth. Of
course one believes in these revelations after asserting their validity for example regarding
the Quran understanding its miracle, rather than the popular believe amongst the masses that
religion is only faith based and reason has no play which is absolutely untrue as the famous
scholar Allamah Muhammad Hussain Tabatabai has written:
Belief follows reason and understanding; and nothing but reason and understanding can
create it.
We seem to have a chain of explanations which always ends with God, or with what man has
made up to explain something eternal. Its essential to understand that the chain of cause and
effect should terminate at a necessary existence which is not an effect. This is where the chain
stops because an endless chain of cause and effect is impossible, therefore there must be an
initial cause which is self-subsistent depending on no other existent.
The observable universe seems strangely suited for life and we are good evidence of it, the
work of a cosmic designer. Scientist have been aware of this for a long time but unfortunately
have chosen to ignore it. Examples of this can be portrayed in the amount of hydrogen

created in the universe, if there was less hydrogen created it would have been problematic for
life to emerge as stars like our sun are hydrogen reactors, that would have starved of fuel
without the abundance of hydrogen, or that hydrogen combined with oxygen makes water, a
vital part of life, even us humans contain about 75% water, further if gravity was stronger
stars would burn faster and die younger, and if gravity was strong enough not to allow stars to
live considerably long, there would be not enough time for life to evolve if you accept this
theory, as evolution occurs over a long period of time. These are only a few out of many
examples available to us. How was it that from one bang all these details went right for life to
form and for life to exist on earth and even perhaps on other planets that we are unware of.
In order to combat this scenario of what appears to be design, scientist are now pushing
another theory which stands with the minority of scientist but gaining popularity, the theory
known as the multiverse. The multiverse suggests that there are many universes out there
popping into existence and that our universe is one of many universes perhaps even one of an
infinite amount of universes that exists, the multiverse tries to explain why our universe is fit
for life suggesting that it was chance and luck that from an infinite or large number of bangs
of course with each bang going off, a new set of laws of physics could have formed in that
particular universe, and that our one was the lucky one to support life, sort of like winning the
lottery if enough people play and try to win then probability tells you that eventually
someone would win it, as opposed to the single big bang where only one bang went off and a
universe was formed that is bio-friendly and fit for life which goes against extraordinary
odds, like playing the lottery once but having say to choose some numbers from billions of
numbers and getting it right the first time, even that example does not justify the sheer odds
our universe went through for one single bang to go right for life to occur, no wonder why so
many people by just contemplating this phenomenon will start to believe in God.
After ignoring the fact that our universe is fit for life and after the steady state theory which
claimed the universe to be eternal was proven untrue, scientist now in order to do away with
design are starting to push the multiverse, some of whom are biased atheist who have an
agenda in asserting the multiverse. Calming our universe to be the lucky one to support life
and that we the observers are here to observe it, while the other universe whom are sterile go
unnoticed with no inhabitants to observe them. The problem with the multiverse is that these
other universes are never observed and the theory is hard to test, also what is generating all
these universes how are they coming into existence and lastly how did all this come into
existence and who originated it in the first place, therefore once again pushing the chain of
explanation further back to only once again reach God as the first of the first existing when
there was nothing and originating, creating the universe and its laws. Some even see the
multiverse as an attempt to avoid God and as the last resort of the desperate atheist. Now
some critics may say that it is lazy to just say God did it and that is the end of the story, in
reply I say there is no issue with trying to figure out the way of Gods creation using our God
given intellect, we know God created the universe from reliable revelation as to how God did
it there is no problem with studying science and trying to figure it out, so lazy is out of the
equation and knowledge may flourish to its possible limits.
In the case of living organisms, their existence seems to depend on a number of fortuitous
coincidences that some scientists and philosophers have hailed as nothing short of
astonishing, as biological systems have very special requirements and that these requirements
have been happily met by nature, for example had water not existed or had the laws of
physics been somewhat different so that the substance did not enjoy these special properties
then life (as we know it) would be impossible. The universe also seems to have high order,

there exists well defined laws of physics and definite cause-effect relationships, the evidence
suggest that this is not any old universe but one which is remarkably well adjusted to the
existence of certain interesting and significant entities. Isaac Newton believed that the solar
system appeared too contrived to have arisen solely from the action of blind forces.
The most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the
counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being
Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica by Isaac Newton (1687), bk. III, General
Scholium
For many Scientist it was too much to suppose that the harmonious organisation of nature
was a result of mere chance, Robert Boyle introduced the famous compression between the
universe and a clockwork mechanism which went roughly as follows, say you were
crossing a heath and came upon a watch lying on the ground. On inspecting the watch, you
observed the intricate organisations of its parts and how they were arranged together in a
cooperative way to achieve a collective end. Even if you have never seen a watch and had no
idea of its function, you would still be led to conclude from youre inspection that this was a
contrivance designed for a purpose. This is another argument used however analogies are a
weak form of argument.
Biology which is the study of life along with Darwinian evolution has attempted to explain
the evolution of life throughout its many stages as will be explained later on, however where
Darwinian evolution has really struggled is in explaining the evolution process when it comes
to the field of biochemistry, let me give you an example. Some bacteria contain a flagellum, a
long hair like filament embedded in the cell membrane, a swimming device which rotates so
that the cell may swim. The Bacterial flagellum is necessarily composed of at least three
parts, a paddle, a rotor, and a motor making it irreducibly complex, meaning bacterial
flagellum is too complex to have evolved from a lesser form and explaining it through
gradual evolution is an extremely difficult task. In regards to the topic the biochemist Michael
Behe writes in his book Darwins black box.
Even though we are told that all biology must be seen through the lens of evolution, no
scientist has ever published a model to account for the gradual evolution of this extraordinary
molecular machine.
When it comes to biology however things are slightly different especially since the
introduction of Darwins theory of evolution. When you look at the different life forms and
their features like the wing of the bird, the eye, hart and the brain of the human which we use
easily but which are at the same time very complex we tend to see design everywhere we
look, however believers of the theory of evolution suggest no design at all as Darwins theory
of evolution demonstrated that complex organisations efficiently adapted to the environment
could arise as a result of random mutations and natural selection, if the species fail to adapt to
their environments demands then they will go extinct as was the case with 99.9 per cent of
species that ever lived, which are now extinct and we are the lucky 0.1 per cent which lives
on as estimated by the palaeontologist George Simpson, this means that from the billions of
species that have lived contemporary species which are a few millions are the only ones not
yet extinct and unfortunately our species due to our interference have caused other species to
become extinct at a fast pace, even though those species had adapted to their environment and

could have survived if it wasnt for the human interference which continues meaning we will
cause more species to go extinct in the future to, it is not too difficult for a species to become
extinct only to be replaced by another.
Mutations are basically a change in the DNA, the DNA is what affects the way we look,
while natural selection is basically having a trait which give you an advantage in surviving
which allows you to pass on this trait to future generation, a good example of this can be
found in the peppered moths which are usually white with black speckles which helps it
camouflage with the lichen covered tree trunk making it more difficult for predators to see it
and therefore eat it, on the other hand you have the black moths which due to genetic
mutations are black therefore they do not camouflage with the tree and are more likely to be
seen and eaten by birds and other predators therefore not allowing it to pass off as many
offspring as the white moth, which will have better success at living longer and producing
more offspring, as seen by the evidence that more of the paler moths where observed in the
wild. However in the 19 century it was observed in the cites where industrialisation and
domestic coal fires caused tree trunks and walls to become black, the black moths due to now
being able to camouflage with the black tree trunks and walls were in greater number due to
the reverse effect, of now the black moths having the advantage of camouflaging with its
environment which in turn gave it an advantage of escaping its predators due to it being
harder to see, and thus this proves that natural selection is indeed in play and true.
So we find that yes mutation, natural selection, adaptation, genetic drift are facts of life and
are the part which are facts when scientist say evolution is fact, however they do not usually
clearly distinguish for you that even though they are facts what remains a theory is the
evolution of spices to the extent where one species evolves to another different species, which
if you were to question them about it and its validity there would be an uproar and quick
responds and attacks against you by scientist for questioning it, it is no different when it
comes to most of the scientific students as people usually take what they learn or the first
doctrine taught to them to be true and defend it at any cost without truly contemplating the
matter with an unbiased mind. People seem to also follow authorities and become more
motivated in groups, therefore not having the individual capacity to be objective. Intellectual
and wise person should question their believes and ideologies and see if it could stand the test
or not, this is a path that will require much more knowledge and effort, with that being said I
am not saying that the theory of evolution of species is false nor am I saying with 100%
certainty that it is true but it is a theory and from my humble and limited knowledge predict
that it will be a theory forever. Even though the majority of scientist hold it to be true without
questioning it or by hiding information from the public so that it may not be used as ammo
for creationist. With that being said you also find some scientist with PhDs who will disagree
with the amount of change natural selection and mutations could change a species, an
example of which is the Biochemist Michael Behe.
Some of the evidence used for the evolution of species include genetics the DNA
(deoxyribonucleic acid), a DNA molecule consists of two polynucleotides strands held
together by a hydrogen bonding between their complementary bases, DNA exists in our cells
and shapes how an organism grows can show us how similar we are between our own species
and other species, for example between humans there is a 0.1% difference on average, which
is enough to make us look different while between us and the African apes, there is around a
3.1% difference which is enough to make us, us and them, them. We also share 50% of our

DNA with a banana. DNA coding is the coding for the way our bodies look and operate, and
some hold the idea that similar DNA must indicate common ancestry. Its however similar to
how an architect typically uses similar building materials for various buildings, or how car
manufacturers uses the same car parts in different car models. If creation had a common
designer (God) then we would find a similar blueprint used in many creatures which we do.
So what does this all mean, are we around 96% Apes? To the question of whether sharing
roughly 96 percent of our genetic make-up with chimps makes us 96 percent chimp,
evolutionist Steven Jones, a renowned British geneticist, humorously commented, We also
share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesnt make us half bananas
However it is true to say that you find similarities in all species and this is something that has
been said around 1400 years ago by Imam Ali (a) in one of his sermons (185) as he says
towards the end of the sermon,
Everything has (the same) delicacy and detail, and every living being has little difference.
Then you have fossils which provide a record of the organisms that were living at each time
in the past which scientist have found in numerous areas of the earth. As according to the
Quran God says.

Say, Travel over the land and then observe how He has originated the creation. Then Allah
shall bring about the genesis of the hereafter. Indeed Allah has power over all things (29:20)
In Nemuneh Commentary it explains this verse saying: today, these types of verses can
correspond to a more precise and deeper meaning for scientist, meaning that they should go
and observe the remainings of prehistoric creatures which can now be found as fossils in the
depths of the seas, and in the core of mountains and in between the layers of the earth in order
to comprehend some of the mysteries of the origination of life on earth and the supremacy
and splendour of God, and realize that He is capable of the restitution of life.
Fossils of species which strike a resemblance to humans with some differences like the
Australopithecus, Homo Habilis, and Homo erectus which show different forms of the
hominid family are said to be evidence of evolution of species that we evolved from them.
There is no doubt about the species who lived on the earth in the past and whom their fossils
have been found. However we are the children of Adam who was the first modern human.
Whether this was done through an interruption in the evolutionary chain or if the fossils
found of similar species was not the result of one evolving into another and they were
different separate species with similarities in structure remains unknown to me. Yes evolution
is a fact and I believe it through its evidence but to what extent can evolution drive change in
species, such claims that our 185 million great grandfather was a fish in the water remain
difficult to prove and believe. What is certain is that God is the originator and creator of life.
The religion of Islam agrees with modern science that creatures lived even before the time of
Adam (a) which perhaps are the extinct groups of the hominids. According to the content of
Islam it seems very possible that creatures lived before Adam, this can be proven with a
hadith from the book Tawhid of Sheikh Saduq, Imam Sadiq (as) he has been narrated saying:

You think that Allah (swt) hasnt created humans other than yourselves; but He has. He has
created a thousand thousand [a million] Adams, and you are the descendants of the final
Adam. (Translation of Al-Mizan, vol. 4, pg231)
While according to Allamah Tabatabai the following verse of the Quran also suggest the idea
that creatures existed before Prophet Adam (a)

And when your Lord said to the angels, "Verily I am going to make in the earth a vicegerent";
they said: "wilt thou place in it such as shall make mischief in it and shed blood. (2:30)
the verse implies that before the creation of Adam, there were others living on the earth.
Furthermore Imam Sadiq (as) said: "If the angels hadn't seen the humans that shedded blood
then why did they say" "wilt thou place in it such as shall make mischief in it and shed
blood (Majlisi, Biharul-Anwar, vol. 11, pg. 117)
This is not saying that homo sapiens the modern human lived before Adam, but it is most
likely referring to the extinct groups of the hominids perhaps what scientist now refer to as
Australopithecus, Homo habilis, and Homo erectus. Among the earliest Homo sapiens,
humans (earliest known not necessarily the first) were the Cro-Magnon from the cave of
southern France where their remains were found, had showed signs in the belief of an
afterlife as they carefully tended their dead, which were sometimes painted with red ochre
and buried with their various artefacts, they also expressed themselves through paintings and
sculpture.
Dating tells us how old fossils are examples of which are Potassium-argon dating, Argonargon dating, Carbon-14 to name some, there is no issue here as Islam has not given an age to
the earth or the universe which is said to be around 4.5 billion years old, and 13.8 billion
years according to scientist. However there is debate on this subject, with some calming the
earth to be 6000 years old around 4000 B.C.E, though history shows us that there is good
evidence that sheep were domesticated in northern Iraq around 9000 B.C.E, wheat and barley
were domesticated in southwest Iran around 7000 B.C.E and that writing began in Egypt
around 3300-3100 B.C.E. Scientist also have in the past miscalculated the age of the earth,
which now we know was an error, example of which is Buffon who claimed the earth was
75000 years old which he based at the rate at which metal balls cool off after being heated
with the idea that the earth and planets had been formed from very hot material. In 1846
William Thompson estimated the earth to be 20 to 30 million years old which is not even
close to the 4.5 billion estimate of modern time determined by radioactive decay portraying
the age of the rocks, each radioisotope decays at a certain rate measured by its half-life, the
time required for half of the initial atom to decay for example the half-life of carbon 14 to
nitrogen 14 is 5730 years.
Finally behaviour which looks at the similarities in behaviour between us and early humans
such as stone tools used, carrying and storing and art to name some.

Another interesting question that arises from this topic is then who did Adams children
marry, a question which does not seem to have one decisive answer but a few answers
attempted by scholars including a contemporary answer that, Prophet Adams children married
the people of the previous generation prior to their extinction, as the above mentioned
evidence of the Quran and Hadith prove that people (other than modern humans) had lived on
earth before Prophet Adam. Therefore it is completely reasonable to believe that the children
of Adam married people of the previous generation prior to their extinction. This is one of
multiple theories amongst scholars as this particular question has different viewpoints.
The theory of evolution claims early life began with barley functional molecules probably
RNAs and proteins, though as to how they originated remains a mystery, as many scientists
admit the origin of life remains unknown. Evolutionary biology deals mainly with how life
changed after its origin. The theory of evolution for example in trying to explain how white
Polar bears came about goes as follows, at the beginning there were a group of brown bears
looking for food in the snowy terrain, due to them being brown and not camouflaging with
snow to some extent their prey easily sees them and runs away, then one day due to some
genetic or mutation the brown bear gives birth to a white bear and that white bear due to
being white, the same colour as the snow makes a better living in catching prey as he is
harder to see by prey and therefore it lives longer than the brown bear competitor and makes
more offspring, its offspring fares better as well due to being white lives longer and they
bread more and before you know it white bears are pre dominating, taking all the food,
driving the brown bear into extinction. There are similar examples with Darwins finches
where it was discovered that the finches on different islands had developed different kind of
beaks in order to adapt to their environment (adaptation), or that from a herd of sheep one
sheep through perhaps a mutation develops a different kind of wool, or you have the example
of bacteria and the Lederberg experiment in 1952 where they got a plate put bacteria on it and
allowed it to grow into colonies, later they got a plate which contained the antibiotic
penicillin, what was discovered was that not all the bacteria died because of the penicillin, as
some bacteria were resistance to it, thanks to a mutation that must have occurred even prior to
the transfer even though those bacteria had never encountered penicillin before they were
immune to it due to a mutation that must have occurred.
All these examples we just spoke about besides maybe the polar bear example, have enough
evidence to prove them true, and if you believe in God or not it wont make any difference.
Where the problem does exist and where there is not sufficient evidence is with the evolution
of species This is where most of the debates occur, for example as we stated earlier according
to Richard Dawkins your 185 Millionth great grandfather was a fish, or that us humans
known as homo sapiens meaning wise man had a common ancestor with apes that we
evolved from, that common ancestor is still unknown to us in regards to the myth that is
commonly thought of by people that we directly evolved from apes which according to the
theory is not the case rather evolutionary chain leading to modern man was more like this
according to the theory
Australopithecus Homo Habilis Homo erectus Homo Sapiens
In conclusion this is sensitive, strongly debated topic with each side portraying a robust bias
to their ideology, which has slowed down the progress of the dialect. No one has
comprehensive knowledge of what happened all those years ago nor does anyone poses all
the information and secrets of what occurred and will occur in the heavens and earth except

the one who created them gave them their laws and allowed them to function and reach their
current stage. We must be humble with knowledge and not use our speculation to be taught as
facts. I personally follow the works of scientist and the works of religious scholars. Keep in
mind an expert in one field (for example science) is not an expert in another field (example
religion). Not everyone needs to be a scientist, just like not everyone needs to be an
accountant, though everyone, scientist, accountant and others all need to find inner peace and
self-develop themselves. Evident in our modern day is the lack of religion and the increase of
physiological illnesses despite the advancement in treatments and remedies. Therefore
conduct much research, remain neutral on topics which are in the grey area and be a certain
advocate about what is certainly true. Not everything you read, see, or hear is true and not
every intellectual is wise.

They say, There is nothing but the life of this world: we live and we die, and nothing but
time destroys us But they do not have any knowledge of that, and they only make
conjectures. (45:24)