“Scientific myths,” may sound like an oxymoron, but I think it is fitting here. The scientific community claims that religion employs myths to explain the unexplainable, but that is exactly what the scientific community does. When scientists cannot explain certain phenomenon they develop myths to explain the unexplainable; they just call them theories. Theories sound more scientific.
Theoretical physicists like Lawrence Krauss, who is Foundation Professor of the School of Earth and Space Exploration at Arizona State University, and director of its Origins Project, and Michio Kaku, professor of theoretical physics at the City College of New York and CUNY Graduate Center, theorize the universe and all the matter that would ever exist, came into being from nothing, and was dispersed throughout the universe within the first three minutes of the Big Bang.
Theories are just scientific myths.
This means the matter that formed distant stars got to their current location in less than three minutes, but these scientists tell us energy in the form of light took millions of light years to make the return trip. Kaku explained this by saying matter can move through the vacuum of space faster than the speed of light. So I guess matter can move faster than the speed of light, but light cannot move faster than the speed of light. We call this science.
The Scriptures declare, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” that is to say, the universe. He did that during the first day; He created everything from nothing. And I believe He did that in less time than it took for Him to say, “Let there be light,” which was much less than three minutes or even twenty-four hours for that matter. He probably took the rest of the day off to enjoy His handiwork.
What is the difference between the myth of the Big Bang and the myth of Creation?
But some scientists would call me superstitious for believing the universe was created by God, while they claim the universe came into existence without God. It left me wondering what is the difference between science and myth when it comes to the origin of the universe?
Then it struck me; theirs is an educated myth. Then I thought, what makes an educated myth better than a religious myth? Maybe an educated myth is made by educated people using educated language. And maybe they invent an educated myth because they think they must have an answer for things they don’t have any evidence for.
Without evidence theories are just myths.
Scientists invent some theories to explain things they have no evidence for in the same way they accuse believers for inventing God to explain things we have no evidence for (of course, we maintain we did not invent God, it was the other way around).
So we have come full circle back to my original thought, what is the difference between what science says about the origin of the universe, and believers say about the universe’s origin? It is a question of faith; some believe in an scientific myth, and some believe in a Creator.