Big Bang Theory???

[Carey]

ANd God said let there be light and (BIIIIGGGG BANGGGGG!!!) there was light.

what ya'll think?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

ANd God said let there be light and (BIIIIGGGG BANGGGGG!!!) there was light.

what ya'll think?

Yep. The first Light was a "spiritual" Light of the Creator so He could see what He was doing better. The article "the" is not in the Hebrew so this could imply it was "out of space and time". Thoughts?

Gene 1:
1 In [a]beginning Elohim created the Heavens/shamayim and the Land/'erets.
2 and the Land/'erets became to be waste/vain/tohuw and empty/void/bohuw, and darkness on surface of submerged chaos/t@howm, and [a] spirit/ruwach of [SIZE=+2]'elohiym[/SIZE] brooding/rachaph over face/paniym of the waters
3 And Elohim is saying, "he shall become Light" and he is becoming Light
4 and Elohim is seeing the Light that good, and Elohim is seperating between the Light and between the Darkness.
5 And Elohim is calling to Light/'owr, Day/yowm, and to Darkness/choshek he calls Night/layil , and he is becoming evening and he is becoming morning Day One.

 

[Tonks]

ANd God said let there be light and (BIIIIGGGG BANGGGGG!!!) there was light.

what ya'll think?

Actually, the big bang can fit in well with Christian theology considering the very moments after the "bang," as it were the entirely universe was a low-entropy system - highly ordered.

The big bang is not antithetical to Christian theology unless one holds to the an aboslute literal interpretation of Genesis. I, obviously, do not and am comfortable with a scientific explanation of a theological mystery.

 

[sempervirens]

I like the theory - angels dancing on the head of a pin. There is a thought provoking parallel between all of creation contained in the smallest space imaginable, and all of salvation history starting with the small - in the incarnation of our Lord in Mary's womb.

The theory itself starts at the Planck time - or 1/10^43 second after the moment of creation itself. Before that time its a mystery - I think scientists should be as careful as the priests attending to the Holy of Holies and tie a rope around themselves before going down the rabbit hole of speculation as to what occuried prior to the Planck time.

Trivia: The big bang was first theorized by Georges Lemaitre - a Belgian Catholic priest (and he was a Jesuit to boot!)

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Actually, the big bang can fit in well with Christian theology considering the very moments after the "bang," as it were the entirely universe was a low-entropy system - highly ordered.

The big bang is not antithetical to Christian theology unless one holds to the an aboslute literal interpretation of Genesis. I, obviously, do not and am comfortable with a scientific explanation of a theological mystery.

As a physics major, I make it an absolute point to never talk about science at a religious website - and I won't violate that here.

But, I just want to give a to Tonk's post here since it gives me a chance to agree with him - and that doesn't happen a lot in our discussions, LOL

(Actually, I'd bet we agree at least 95% of the time but seldom do things we agree on get discussed at GT)


My perspective...


Pax.


- Josiah


.

 

[racer]

ANd God said let there be light and (BIIIIGGGG BANGGGGG!!!) there was light.

what ya'll think?

I think you've hit the nail on the head . . . .

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Actually, the big bang can fit in well with Christian theology considering the very moments after the "bang," as it were the entirely universe was a low-entropy system - highly ordered.

The big bang is not antithetical to Christian theology unless one holds to the an aboslute literal interpretation of Genesis. I, obviously, do not and am comfortable with a scientific explanation of a theological mystery.

I if Genesis cannot be taken as literal, then neither can the rest of the Bible all the way through Revelation. There is also no article "the" before beginning.

Gene 1:
1 In [a] beginning 'elohiym created the Heavens/shamayim and the Land/'erets.
2 and the Land/'erets became to be waste/vain/tohuw and empty/void/bohuw, and darkness on surface of submerged chaos/t@howm, and [a] spirit/ruwach of 'elohiym brooding/rachaph over face/paniym of the waters
3 And 'elohiym is saying, "he shall become Light" and he is becoming Light

 

[Carey]

Yep. The first Light was a "spiritual" Light of the Creator so He could see what He was doing better. The article "the" is not in the Hebrew so this could imply it was "out of space and time". Thoughts?

Gene 1:
1 In [a]beginning Elohim created the Heavens/shamayim and the Land/'erets.
2 and the Land/'erets became to be waste/vain/tohuw and empty/void/bohuw, and darkness on surface of submerged chaos/t@howm, and [a] spirit/ruwach of [SIZE=+2]'elohiym[/SIZE] brooding/rachaph over face/paniym of the waters
3 And Elohim is saying, "he shall become Light" and he is becoming Light
4 and Elohim is seeing the Light that good, and Elohim is seperating between the Light and between the Darkness.
5 And Elohim is calling to Light/'owr, Day/yowm, and to Darkness/choshek he calls Night/layil , and he is becoming evening and he is becoming morning Day One.

Yes Gods perception of space and (time) is the only thing not to be taken literal in Genesis

 

[Oblio]

CJ, have you read The Science of God by Gerald Schoeder ?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes Gods perception of space and (time) is the only thing not to be taken literal in Genesis

I agree. So perhaps this "New Creation" in revelation and all of revelation is also symbolic?

Reve 12:5 and she brought forth a strong male child, who is about to be SHEPHERDING all the nations with a rod/staff of iron, and caught away was her child unto God and His throne,

 

[Carey]

I if Genesis cannot be taken as literal, then neither can the rest of the Bible all the way through Revelation. There is also no article "the" before beginning.

Gene 1:
1 In [a] beginning 'elohiym created the Heavens/shamayim and the Land/'erets.
2 and the Land/'erets became to be waste/vain/tohuw and empty/void/bohuw, and darkness on surface of submerged chaos/t@howm, and [a] spirit/ruwach of 'elohiym brooding/rachaph over face/paniym of the waters
3 And 'elohiym is saying, "he shall become Light" and he is becoming Light

Yes God explains in another part ofthe Bible his perception of time is different than ours.

So it is the only part of Genesis not to be taken literal.

All prophecy not to be taken literal are interpreted such as Daniels Visions. They are in the same Chapter as written translated usually but at times one must Cross reference to other Books of the Bible. God said he would make prophecy a mystery until the closing of the age.
When he would pore his spirit (with wich) comes understanding upon the world.
For instance before the invention of nuclear atomic weapons there was noway for mankind to understand how a mans tongue and eyes could be burned from his head and his flesh from his bones before they hit the
ground. But they saw at Hiroshima that happen.
He said at the end of the age knowlege would be increased. Look at the change in technology in the last
150 years. Prior to that we were still using transportation of animal drwn mobiles as they did for millenia before.
He said after the rebirth of Israel that generation would not pass away before his return to rule on earth for 1000 years. Israel was reborn in the 8 day war in the 1950's
I am from a younger generation than that one and that one can't pass away before his return.
So assuming I live a normal life span of that generation I should be alive when Christ returns, is'nt it cool?

 

[Carey]

I think you've hit the nail on the head . . . .[/quote

hmmmmm???

 

[Carey]

CJ, have you read The Science of God by Gerald Schoeder ?

No tell me about it please

 

[Carey]

As a physics major, I make it an absolute point to never talk about science at a religious website - and I won't violate that here.

But, I just want to give a to Tonk's post here since it gives me a chance to agree with him - and that doesn't happen a lot in our discussions, LOL

(Actually, I'd bet we agree at least 95% of the time but seldom do things we agree on get discussed at GT)


My perspective...


Pax.


- Josiah


.

Physics major you might want to search the new Einstein . His name is Mordehai Milgram
He goes by Moti Milgram do a google search you'll love it.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yes God explains in another part ofthe Bible his perception of time is different than ours.

So it is the only part of Genesis not to be taken literal.

All prophecy not to be taken literal are interpreted such as Daniels Visions. They are in the same Chapter as written translated usually but at times one must Cross reference to other Books of the Bible. God said he would make prophecy a mystery until the closing of the age.

I take very little of the Bible as "literal" and who are you to pick and choose what is literal and what is not? How do you define that? Thanks.

Matt 23:31 "Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. 32 "Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' [guilt.] 33 "Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of gehenna?

Ezkeiel 39:12 "For seven months the house of Israel will be burying Them, in order to Cleanse/purify the land. 13 "Indeed all the people of the land will be burying, and they will gain renown for it on the day that I am glorified," says the GOD.

 

[Carey]

I agree. So perhaps this "New Creation" in revelation and all of revelation is also symbolic?

Reve 12:5 and she brought forth a strong male child, who is about to be SHEPHERDING all the nations with a rod/staff of iron, and caught away was her child unto God and His throne,

With what God says he is going to do with world and Satan after the 1000 year reign I am thinking there will be a need for a new Earth. And I beleive those of us that are Changed and given new bodies are destined to help him finish his infinite universe.

 

[ScottBot]

Actually, the big bang can fit in well with Christian theology considering the very moments after the "bang," as it were the entirely universe was a low-entropy system - highly ordered.

The big bang is not antithetical to Christian theology unless one holds to the an aboslute literal interpretation of Genesis. I, obviously, do not and am comfortable with a scientific explanation of a theological mystery.

Ain't it great being Catholic.

 

[Carey]

I like the theory - angels dancing on the head of a pin. There is a thought provoking parallel between all of creation contained in the smallest space imaginable, and all of salvation history starting with the small - in the incarnation of our Lord in Mary's womb.

The theory itself starts at the Planck time - or 1/10^43 second after the moment of creation itself. Before that time its a mystery - I think scientists should be as careful as the priests attending to the Holy of Holies and tie a rope around themselves before going down the rabbit hole of speculation as to what occuried prior to the Planck time.

Trivia: The big bang was first theorized by Georges Lemaitre - a Belgian Catholic priest (and he was a Jesuit to boot!)

You also may like some of the findings of Morti Milgram
do a google search on him.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I agree. So perhaps this "New Creation" in revelation and all of revelation is also symbolic?

Reve 12:5 and she brought forth a strong male child, who is about to be SHEPHERDING all the nations with a rod/staff of iron, and caught away was her child unto God and His throne,

Actually, the big bang can fit in well with Christian theology considering the very moments after the "bang," as it were the entirely universe was a low-entropy system - highly ordered.

The big bang is not antithetical to Christian theology unless one holds to the an aboslute literal interpretation of Genesis. I, obviously, do not and am comfortable with a scientific explanation of a theological mystery.

Ain't it great being Catholic.

Isn't it also just great to be In Christ and a New Creation.
Btw, what are others view on the old/new "heaven and earth" from a Jewish perspective.

(Young) 2 Corinthians 5:17 so that if any one [is] in Christ--[he is] a new creature/creation; the old things did pass away, lo, become new have the all things.

(Young) Revelation 21:5 And He who is sitting upon the throne said, `Lo, new I make all things; and He saith to me, `Write, because these words are true and stedfast;'

 

[Carey]

I agree. So perhaps this "New Creation" in revelation and all of revelation is also symbolic?

Reve 12:5 and she brought forth a strong male child, who is about to be SHEPHERDING all the nations with a rod/staff of iron, and caught away was her child unto God and His throne,

There will have to be a new Creation after He does to what he says he's gonna do to Satan the earth and its inhabitants after the 1000 year reign
this 1000 year reign is when he is sheprding with a Rod of Iron . But after that time of peace a fertility on the earth he will loose Satan and the ones who deny Christ after the 1000 year reign are left behind he opens the First seal of Jehovas Rath