Physics and theology: dialogue between science and religion today

1. Entity type Lemma
2. Original titleФизика и богословие: современное состояние диалога науки и религии
3. Language term Russian
4. lemma author Asliturk, Miriam
5. lemma category Complementarity - Biology:evolution - Various approaches to the problem of correlation between science and theology - Scientific theories and disciplines - Ecumenism and dialogue > Dialogue between religions
6. Publication date 12-01-2017
7. lemma work Priest Belodurov Georgy [Author]. Физика и богословие: современное состояние диалога науки и религии
8. lemma manifestations Храм Святителя Николая Мирликийского
9. Keywords Big Bang - Evolution - Russian Orthodox Church - Science
10. Url Click Here
11. Citations
    1. <p>Belodurov, Georgy (2002). Физика и богословие: современное состояние диалога науки и религии. <em>Физика и богословие: современное состояние диалога науки и религии. </em>Retrieved from http://www.spas.tvcom.ru/art4.html</p>
12. Lemma body

    1. The Priest Belodurov was a professor of physics at a secular university before turning to religion. In this article Belodurov gives his opinion on the relationship between religion and modern science on his parish’s website. Belodurov explains that Soviet Communist ideology proclaimed the incompatibility of science and religion, although in the West the two coexisted. The author reveals several aspects that can be shared by science and religion. One of them is the theory of the big bang (TBB) developed after Einstein’s (1879-1955) Theory of Relativity in 1916. In 1924 Russian mathematician A. Friedman (1888-1925) proposed a model of an infinitely growing universe. American astronomer E. Hubble (1889-1953) empirically proved the constant enlarging of the universe. In 1948 Russian theoretical physicist G. Gamow (1904-1968) spoke of the possible existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background, which was empirically proven by A. Penzias (b.1933) and R. Wilson (b. 1936) in 1965. TBB suggests that the universe has a beginning. 

       According to the author, the closest religious explanation of this is contained in Book of Genesis, which claims that the universe was created out of nothing. The Catholic Church accepted TBB, and a number of Catholic theologians were invited to observe scientific experiments for TBB. Protestants refused TBB as did Soviet scientists before Stalin’s death in 1953.

       Originally the Christian Church dated its calendar from the origin of the world, and according to it our 2002 is 7511, whereas science thinks that the universe is 20 billion years old. There can be three ways to solve this problem. One of them is the unscientific Protestant literal interpretation of the Bible, reading “6 days of creation” as our 24 hours multiplied by six. The ROC priests D. Sysoev (1974-2009) and K. Bufeev (b.1961) sponsored by Protestant organizations support this idea. The author of the article proposes another explanation. He supports the idea of reconciliation of science and religion, in which TBB has a crucial role. According to Belodurov, the return to Laplas’ (1749-1827) theory of the universe with endless homogeneous space would mean a return to the dark ages of the so-called Enlightenment. For the author it is the Enlightenment that brought conflict between religion and science, whereas 20^th century science brought science back to religion. TBB assumes that at the moment of the creation of the universe there is a period when matter represents the electromagnetic field. In fact, says the author, this corresponds to the biblical concept of Light that came out of nothing.

       Finally, there is an attempt nowadays to keep a distance between science and religion. This becomes problematic when contemporary theologists do not have any comments on modern science regarding cosmology. They separate the celestial paradise from our reality. For these theologians the book of creation only talks about the celestial heavens. And our world for them is where Adam and Eve descend in their Fall. This point of view sees problems of cosmology in the sense of the role of human in this world and future world that will come with the return of God. For example, the PhD dissertation of P. Malkov “On God, human, and universe” does not speak of any connection between the geocentric world of heaven and our heliocentric universe. For Malkov the science of our world cannot examine the world of heavens. The author points out that this brings a problem known in science as the so called “joining” of two close fields limited by a border. Belodurov points out that if something is moving from one field to the other, some common conditions should remain for this action. He concludes by stating that in accordance with the anthropic principle, our universe was purposely created for human life. Modern physics for example demonstrates that even a small-scale change in the laws of nature would not allow Planet Earth to exist. For example, a change of gravity in the universe by five percent would hinder the formation of stars.