[An essay on science, cosmogenesis and religion]

The relationships between science and religion are not easy from both the parts. But, the major controversy deals with the cosmogenesis and, thus, the existence of God. Science excludes the hypothesis of a divine creation, while theology assumes the origin of universe as a mere supernatural act. In my opinion, the scientific negation of the existence of God is a merely fideistic position, being founded on the hypothesis that the Bing Bang was an episode governed by casuality. An hypothesis that is more dogmatic that the Plato's idea of a demiurge as the creator of universe. As a matter of fact, nobody, among the scientists, has never explained how something of concrete can be created from Nothingness, i.e., 1. how the primitive Black Hole could have had its origin; 2. how the primordial Black Hole was physically filled up by raw matter, energy, space and time; 3. in which space and time the black hole was located assuming that the both the physical space and time were resident inside its context; 4. why the physical time is immaterial in its essence. All these interrogatives can be better explained by assuming the existence of a divine Creator, existing in a metaphysical spatial and temporal setting, whose omnipotence only can be effective in giving origin to a novel physical matter, energy, space and time. Additionally, the epistemology of science pretends that the scientific negation of something has to be derived by undisputable observational or experimental or theoretic evidences. Finally, it is important to stress that the modern science has its base of knowledge in the statistical probabilistic certainty. With respect to this the fideistic probability that God really exists, is only apparently equivalent to the fideistic probability that God does not exist. Blaise Pascal has clearly demonstrated that is more logical to believe in God than the opposite, because it is important to remember that in the presence of equivalent probabilities, the choice has to be conceived to the existence of God which is more apologetically convincing and intellectually convenient. Affirming the existence of God means to gain the eternal life in a transcendental reality. The atheistic negation of God means nothing and implies the conclusion that the life of human beings has no meaning, as no meaning has the nature as well as the universe. It is, thus, more confortable that the theological positivism should prevail on the scientific negativism.