• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Are the Big Bang and Genesis Actually the Same Story?

Discussion in 'Creation & Theistic Evolution' started by Online.Gamer.79, Sep 19, 2020.

  1. Online.Gamer.79

    Online.Gamer.79 New Member

    89
    +66
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    For many generations, narratives about the origin of life were divided into enemy camps. But perhaps it’s actually the same story, told in two languages?

    By Gid’on Lev Sep 19, 2020

    Two big bangs

    At bottom, life is a combination of three phenomena: structural distinctiveness created by a membrane that separates the cell from its surroundings; a collection of chemical reactions (metabolism); and the ability to reproduce, based, among other elements, on the replication of genetic information. These phenomena rest on three types of biomolecules, the building blocks of life: lipids, which constitute the cell membrane; proteins, of which the largest group are enzymes, which set metabolism in motion; and the nucleic acids DNA and RNA, which contain the information for creating proteins. The accepted scientific approach is that, because of the vast complexity of these three elements, the journey to life began with one of them, which came into being randomly and then, somehow, spawned an additional one and then the third.

    Over the years, tremendous efforts by researchers have been devoted to finding the origin of life in one of the three elements. The lack of success of laboratory experiments intended to simulate each of the requisite scenarios for the gradual creation of life, has recently led, however, to the examination of a subversive alternative, according to which structurality, metabolism and information replication appeared together, at one and the same time, in a very simple form.

    The “big bang of life” theory faced an obstacle that until recently seemed irresolvable: Each of the three mechanisms of life is based on completely different biochemistry: Nucleic acids are very different from proteins, which are completely different from lipids, and this renders negligible the probability that the building blocks of life appeared in the same place and at the same time, from the same basic chemical substances.

    • The picture began to change with the publication of a subversive, breakthrough article in Nature in 1931. The author was a brilliant Belgian physicist, a graduate of MIT who was, amazingly, also an ordained Catholic priest. That cleric-scientist, Georges Lemaître, pointed to a seemingly surprising phenomenon: The fact that the universe was expanding, as was discovered around that time, suggests that if we were to go back in time, the universe would look smaller and smaller, until in the end we would reach a certain moment when the mass of the entire universe would have been concentrated in a single point, which he called the “primeval atom.” At that point, Lemaître argued, time-space fabric came into being.

    Ninety years later, we are used to this idea, which sounds to us logical and acceptable. But stop and think about it for a moment: The whole vast universe concentrated in one point, and then emerges from it – how? why? – in an instant, like a jack-in-the-box. Wonder of wonders. The scientific community was fiercely critical of Lemaître’s article; Albert Einstein, for example, described his physics as “atrocious.” However, within a short time Einstein acknowledged his mistake, which he termed the biggest blunder of his career, and heaped praise on Lemaître’s theory: “This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened.”

    Thus was born, in the scientific language, the Big Bang narrative – which can be seen as a translation of “Let there be light” in the other language – accepted in the scientific community. Now, perhaps, another big bang has been discovered – of a sudden and simultaneous appearance of lipids, amino acids and nucleotides, a sibling to “And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth the living creature.’”

    God’s incapacity

    This duality – two languages that are so different and yet, as it turns out, not necessarily contradictory – is perhaps not accidental. If we look at the biblical account of Creation, we can find in it a similar duality, an ostensible dispute, around the story of the emergence of mankind. Genesis 1:27 depicts the dramatic event thus: “And God created man in his image, in the image of God he created him; male and female created he them.” This is humankind as the crown of Creation, fashioned after all the animals, man as God’s image, not as a metaphor, in practice.

    The account in Genesis 2:7 is completely different. Here, humankind is created before the animals, “from the dust of the earth,” not as the purpose of Creation but only as a means to sustain it, “to care for it and to maintain it.” Here the man is also created alone; only afterward does God understand that “It is not good for man to be alone,” and makes “a fitting helper for him.”

    God did not create two types of humans, but he created a being of such fierce duality that one creation story was insufficient to accommodate it. If the human being created in the image of the divine can be understood as pure consciousness – human 2.0, made from dust, reflects our sheer physicality. These two facets of humanity are expressed by the names of the protagonists of the biblical narrative: “Adam” is bound up with adama, soil, namely the level of the material, the objective; “Hava” (Eve) connects with havaya, experience – that is, with consciousness, with the subjective.

    It is fair to ask why the second human was created. After all, God looked at Adam I and saw that “it was very good.” Why did he fiddle around in the mud and make Adam II? Possibly because he understood that he didn’t need another one exactly like him. He wanted someone who could do what no god has the capacity to do: fail. For if there is no option of failure, there is no space for effort and no possibility to transcend.

    It’s the duality that allows the offspring of Adam and Eve a life of meaning, but its pursuit is far from simple. Indeed, again and again we fail. Psychoanalyst Erich Fromm hypothesized that the sin that led to the expulsion from the Garden of Eden was not the eating of the fruit of the tree contrary to the divine injunction, but the mutual accusations exchanged by Adam and Eve, who were selfish, alienated. Who did not love.

    Alienation is not only the sin, Fromm wrote, but also the punishment. God did not need to expel Eve and Adam from their garden. By perceiving themselves as separate, they were already outside. Paradise and hell, in this sense, are not physical places but mental states. The Garden of Eden is love, love for all aspects of the human, those in you and those in me. Hell is alienation from them.

    To live in our image

    Humanity has been in hell for a very long time. People, nations, civilizations live amid divisions and estrangement, emphasizing the above-mentioned aspects of the human, while neglecting the other. The more acute the alienation becomes, and the more that one side of the duality is strengthened at the expense of the other side, the higher the temperature of the flames grows. At the moment, the material side has the upper hand, but its achievements – to the extent that they emanate from alienation from the humanistic, the social, and not from fraternity – also involve unprecedented inequality, mental plagues, apocalyptic environmental ruin.

    According to a fifth-century C.E. midrash, man was created on the first day of the month of Tishrei. In other words, the Hebrew New Year is also the birthday of humanity. Perhaps what we can wish for it, for us, is a life of union and fullness instead of a life of alienation and division. That may be our only hope. For us to relate with erudition both of our stories alike, know how to fuse being and thought, meditation and mathematics, mysticism and physics. To be in our image.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Online.Gamer.79

    Online.Gamer.79 New Member

    89
    +66
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    I thought this was a interesting article and meriting discussion.
     
  3. -57

    -57 Well-Known Member

    +1,926
    Christian
    Private
    Interesting...but a lot of objections.

    First, Gen 1 tells us man was created after the animals. Now, I'm no Hebrew language expert but from what I read from biblical scholars, commentaries etc. the following translation is correct.
    Gen 2:19 Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.

    Even without the word "had" it still can present what God had already done.
     
  4. -57

    -57 Well-Known Member

    +1,926
    Christian
    Private
    ......Humanity has been in hell for a very long time.

    i don't think so for obvious reasons. The bible doesn't support that accusation.
     
  5. d taylor

    d taylor Well-Known Member

    +1,373
    United States
    Protestant
    Single
    No, there is no big bang.

    The science delusion is large and many believe in it, to bad many of those are christians.
     
  6. Friedrich Rubinstein

    Friedrich Rubinstein Active Member

    248
    +293
    Germany
    Christian
    Private
    Big Bang is a naturalistic theory that's based on the precondition that a God does not exist. The theory contains a lot of gaps which are filled by assumptions and the theoretical existence of things that can't be observed. There is no sense in combining Big Bang with Creation because God told us how He created the world, and that means the theory of the Big Bang is false.
     
  7. Brightmoon

    Brightmoon Apes and humans are all in family Hominidae.

    +4,641
    United States
    Episcopalian
    Single
    US-Others
    Th
    the Big Bang is the logical conclusion of decades of direct observation of deep space . Astronomers can directly see what the universe looked like billions of years ago . In fact whether or not you realize it, the Big Bang is still happening . Spacetime is still expanding
     
  8. Online.Gamer.79

    Online.Gamer.79 New Member

    89
    +66
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Single
    yeah but conservative Christians take any question even if you can prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt as someone declaring god does not exist. But fact is the bible were reading is a book that was put together, edited, books were added remove this all happened at the Council of Nicaea roughly 1700 years ago and for about 200 year period the book sculpted and we got the book we call the bible today. And the thing is the books were written buy people who believed the earth was flat and the center of the universe. If you had told them that all stars were planets and other suns they would laughed at you...or depending on the time burned you at the stake for heresy. I believe in the god and that is the only thing I believe in. And Jesus said it best...love god, love your neighbor, you can not break any of gods laws if you follow those two. The speed of light proves the universe is billions of years old, geography proves the earth is about 4 billion years old. But then again when Copernicus and Galileo question church beliefs the church came down on them like a bag of bricks...of course we now know the church was wrong lol...the church is wrong about alot of things.
     
  9. lesliedellow

    lesliedellow Member

    +2,526
    Calvinist
    Single
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    That everything which ever happened in the early Church happened in the summer of 325 is a piece of nonsense usually heard from atheists. The canon of scripture was not even touched upon at the Council of Nicaea.
     
  10. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +6,887
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    That would be kind of weird, considering that the scientist who proposed it was a Catholic Priest. And it was first opposed by atheists, because it suggested creation.
     
  11. Of the Kingdom

    Of the Kingdom Well-Known Member

    553
    +402
    United States
    Christian
    Married
  12. coffee4u

    coffee4u Well-Known Member

    +1,413
    Australia
    Christian
    Married
    The bible makes no mention of a big bang.
    The order of events in the Bible doesn't resemble the order of events in evolution in any way so even if God had used a big bang it would still not be the same thing.
    Evolution is a counterfeit creation story, that is all.

    Humanity is not in hell, but we are living on a groaning fallen earth.
     
Loading...