• AO1 – Knowledge and
Understanding – one side.
• Explain in lots of detail
• 20 mins
• Approx 2 sides
• Link back to the question
• Make links between your paragraphs – don’t produce a list.

a) Explain ways in which religious believers explain the origin of the universe [30]
• Young Earth Creationism - 6 days, creation ex nihilo,
Archbishop Ussher, Bible is Science, God created out of love, God is the omnipotent creator.
• Old Earth Creationism – the ‘days’ were longer periods of time, so the universe originated as long ago as science suggests, Bible central, creation ex nihilo etc.
• Schroeder – the universe originated with the Big Bang,
Genesis gives the symbolic truth that God made the world through the scientific processes of the Big Bang.
• Deism – God made the universe, then left it.
• The Theory of Intelligent Design

•
Explain scientific ideas on the origin and nature of the universe. [30]
ORIGIN = Big Bang approx 13 billion years ago
• Singularity exploded
• <second time and space
• 3 mins protons and neutrons formed atoms
• Half million years, temp cooled enough for hydrogen
•
•
NATURE
• Still expanding from singularity
Still cooling
Random chance – no cause
• Expansion may slow and cause the Big Crunch
• Expansion looks to be and helium to form
• Billion years – stars and quickening – Continuous expansion (Heat Death) galaxies form
• Many stars died before our sun and planets formed
DEAL WITH BOTH ORIGIN
AND NATURE IN DETAIL

Explain scientific ideas about the end of the universe [30]
Big Crunch
• Expansion slows down due to gravity
• All matter rushes back to the point of singularity
• May cause another ‘bang’
– Oscillating Universe
Theory (conditions for life occur by chance)
• Evidence expansion quickening
• Missing matter
Endless Expansion
• Evidence suggests expansion getting faster
• Theory – expand forever
• 2 nd law thermodynamics – eventually run out of energy (entropy)
• Universe will die as no energy. No light or heat means nothing can live = heat death

a) Explain ways in which religious believers explain the origin of life on Earth
• Young Earth Creationism – creation ex nihilo, humans made ‘in God’s image’, the last and greatest of His creation, made to have a relationship with
God, made to look after God’s world and its creatures, world made carefully to support humans and for their enjoyment, all part of a divine plan
• Old Earth Creationism – As above, but different time scale.
• Charles Kingsley – God made humans through the processes of evolution “Old God so wise ...”

Explain scientific ideas on the origin of life [30]
• 1859 – Darwin On the Origin of the Species
• Galapagos Islands – finches
• Natural Selection and adaptation – Example of wolves and the deer.
• Species have adapted and developed over many years from very simple organisms
• Survival of the fittest.
• Explains the existence of intelligent life on earth.
• No need for a Creator God

Explain religious beliefs on the qualities of a creator God.
[30]
• God as Creator – Creationism, God making the world, showing His power and love
• God as Father – creates and loves us all, wants us to be happy, wants us to have a relationship with Him and with each other (creates Eve for Adam)
• God as sustainer – Ontological Dependence, gives order
(time), the world is totally dependant upon God.
• Deism – God is a powerful creator, but the world is now independent from Him.

A good B question will:
• Have a clear argument running through it, but will not use ‘I’.
• Examine both sides.
• Contain analysis (next slide will help)
• Be focussed on the question.
• Come to a conclusion which is based on evidence discussed in the essay.

• This is a very damaging criticism because ___.
• However, one could argue that _____.
• The Design Argument can not stand up against this criticism because _____
• Although Polkinghorne defends the Design
Argument by stating _____, he fails to protect the argument fully because _______.
• Dawkin’s argument’s is weak here because ____.
• Despite this criticism, the Design Argument is still a sound one because ________.

b) “Science and Religion are irrelevant to each other on the issue of the origin of life. [15]
FOR
• Stephen Jay Gould – “We can neither affirm nor deny it, we simply cannot comment on it as scientists.”
• Wittgenstein – Language
Games
AGAINST
• Science destroys religion –
Dawkins
• The Bible is science –
Creationists
• Kingsley and the Anthropic
Principle – religion and science are compatible.

• b) Assess the view that science and religion are complimentary on the issue of the origin of the universe.
[15]
FOR
Schroeder – Genesis and the Big Bang. Symbolic interpretations = science and religion are compatible.
AGAINST
• Conflict – Dawkins,
Creationists
• Irrelevant – Gould,
Wittgenstein

•
• b) “The views of religion and science are in conflict on the issue of the origin of life.” How far do you agree with this statement? [15]
FOR
Science – Dawkins
Religion - Creationism
AGAINST
• Complimentary – Kingsley /
Anthropic Principle
• Irrelevant – Gould,
Wittgenstein

• b) “God is simply an answer for unanswered questions and an explanation for the unexplained.” How far do you agree with this statement? [15]
FOR
Dawkins – God of the
Gaps. Eventually there will be no gaps for God to hide in.
• Criticisms of Schroeder and Kingsley’s attempt to combine religion and science.
AGAINST
• Creationism – God explains everything in the
Bible – Science isn’t needed and religion has
ALL of the answers
• Strengths of Schroeder and Kingsley’s ideas.
• Gould – science and religion shouldn’t be combined at all.

b) “Intelligent Design is a scientific idea.” How far do you agree with this statement?
FOR
• Michele Behe –
Irreducibility of complex structures like DNA
• Anthropic Principle – Finetuning = evidence of God.
• God can be seen in the complexities of science – science has revealed the existence of God.
•
• Daniel Dennett – religious idea. Problems with the eye etc
Dawkins – this is another example of God of the gaps – science reveals that God does NOT exist
(Big Bang and
Evolutionary Theories)
• Gould – science and religion are irrelevant to each other.