I recently read two great books that deal with the beginning of the universe. One is a book of science and one a study in ancient hebrew texts.
The First Three Minutes
The First 3 Minutes is a fascinating walkthrough, by Steven Weinberg, of some of the observations and discoveries that explain to us the movement and expanding of the universe and also it's temperature.
With these observations established he explains how the first 3 minutes of the universe probably took place. A mass of energy, quickly moving, and incredibly hot. From that first minute that mass of energy expanded and cooled.
Those cooling atoms began to connect and form the lightest of molecules and, as they became cooler and slower, combined to become the heavier of molecules.
For most of the reading of this book, I could not help but think, "What a fascinating idea about the beginning of the universe."
The argument seem reasonable and likely.
My only disappointment was Weinberg's start and end of the book. He started describing religious creation myths and cited, as an example, the Viking cosmic cow myth. He then went on to explain that we can toss those ideas aside because of observations of heat and speed of the universe.
It is an unfair to use such a straw man for "myths". Not to mention that he explains in the middle of his book that he is not able to talk about the very beginning of the first 3 minutes. He does not know where the energy came from. This seems like a poor time to throw out some of the more reasonable "myths"
Genesis Bound
My second book was John Sailhamer's book Genesis Unbound. Sailhamer, an imminent Hebrew scholar, does a slow walk through the first two chapters of Genesis (the Christian/Jewish creation "myth").
He sought to address some of the confusion present in the interpretation of the Genesis creation story.
Many interpreters have difficulty and misunderstanding trying to make sense of the 2 chapters and also speak coherently in a scientific manner.
It was particularly elucidating to read that the Hebrew vocabulary, often translated heavens and or earth, is better translated sky and or land. This frames the 6 days of creation as, actually, a week of preparation of a land that would be a major character throughout the rest of the Torah (first five books of the Bible).
He seeks too press into the ancient text to answer the questions the text sought to answer. He, as a result, is faithful to the text and does not need to resort to anti-intellectualism to make sense of the text.
Sailhamer did not reject the idea that the Judeo/Christian God created the entire universe. For him, that particular truth was relegated to Gen 1:1-2 and the preparation comes after that. He does not speculate how the universe was created or how quickly.
I found, with his explanation, the thrust of Genesis and the next four books becomes even more clear and thrilling as a narrative. And, unlike as it had been for me in the past, the first two chapters were no longer disconnected thematically from the rest of the Torah.
With these two books put together I can see a possible explanation for how God created the entirety of the universe: with a massive, hot, and quick ball of rapidly expanding energy. And also a further description of the intimacy of God who prepared a particular land so that he could pursue a people to love.
I have an incredibly creative and close God. One who can make a universe, in all its wonder, and pursue a people and individuals for real relationship with him. And because it is true. I don't have to dispose of reason to have a whole picture.
I will continue to seek and understand and I am glad to have read both of these books as they both endeavored to fill in a piece of the picture.
I would highly recommend both of these books in the conversation of cosmos.