Creationism vs. The Big Bang

[DogmaHunter]

I am challenging you to consider the possibility that some entity(s) of conscious awareness is what spontaneously exists

How does that make any sense?

Which is fundamental -- conscious awareness, or matter?

Matter. Because without matter (arranged in the specific form we call "brains" and/or "life") there is no such awareness.

If you disagree, please demonstrate to me a single instance of "awareness" absent of any matter. Good luck with that.

To quote Tracy Harris, that's like saying that you have a chair made from wood that doesn't come from a tree.

Maybe matter somehow sprang into existence and became conscious, but I don't think so

Matter is not conscious. Consciousness is an emergent property of specific matter arranged in a specific way.

Maybe this conscious being that I AM is dreaming up a spectacular world of material form.

And maybe an undetectable 7-headed dragon is about to eat you.

 

[Armoured]

The created universe ... contracts...

[citation needed]

 

[Stellar Vision]

For the sake of time I'll assume everyone knows what creationism is but recently I've hit a point in my life when science is starting to mess with my faith but the main counter argument I keep having with myself is how we could be here without a God.
.
.
.
Well this topic has been bugging me the past few days which led me do a lot of research but no answer could really logically answer that the universe being created was a random event, so I figured I just get the opinions of my friends from my same faith. Let me know what you think on the subject.

Here's how Fermilab explains it.

The Big Bang Theory - YouTube

 

[lesliedellow]

Physicists tend not to be on their safest ground when they start dabbling in metaphysics - and that is what speculation about what preceeded the big bang is.

Two other universes colliding to produce this one is just one such speculation. Of course, there is one possibility which the atheists amongst them are determined not to entertain.

 

[juvenissun]

Using the same reasoning, logically the deity that you posit as the creator, has to be created as well.

You may begin your special pleading now.

You can not do that logically.

 

[Stellar Vision]

Physicists tend not to be on their safest ground when they start dabbling in metaphysics - and that is what speculation about what preceeded the big bang is.

Two other universes colliding to produce this one is just one such speculation. Of course, there is one possibility which the atheists amongst them are determined not to entertain.

No physicists are on quite safe ground when they make these kind of conjectures, because they're extrapolated from the models of reality that we have already empirically verified.

On the other hand, why should physicists seriously entertain your God idea when you haven't done your homework. There's been no rigorous mathematical model that makes a sentient creator a reasonable postulate. In fact most of you probably revile the idea that we should even persue such a mathematical model.

 

[lesliedellow]

No physicists are on quite safe ground when they make these kind of conjectures, because they're extrapolated from the models of reality that we have already empirically verified.

There is no possibility of empirically verifying the existence of other universes. By definition, no signal from them could ever reach us, even if they existed.

On the other hand, why should physicists seriously entertain your God idea when you haven't done your homework. There's been no rigorous mathematical model that makes a sentient creator a reasonable postulate. In fact most of you probably revile the idea that we should even persue such a mathematical model.

Would you like me to reel off a long list of physicists who take the existence of God absolutely seriously? Freeman Dyson, Charles H Townes, John D Barrow, Christopher Isham, Antony Hewish, just for a start, and there are many more.

I have got a degree in mathematics, but I don't go around with the crazy idea that nothing can exist unless it is capable of mathematical formulation.

 

[Stellar Vision]

There is no possibility of empirically verifying the existence of other universes. By definition, no signal from them could ever reach us, even if they existed.

You can't say that for certain. But more to the point while it may be nearly impossible to experimentally confirm these conjectures they have a solid foundation for being possible scenarios. That's what I'm arguing.

Would you like me to reel off a long list of physicists who take the existence of God absolutely seriously? Freeman Dyson, Charles H Townes, John D Barrow, Christopher Isham, Antony Hewish, just for a start, and there are many more.

Really? What papers are they working on postulating the existence of a god?

I have got a degree in mathematics, but I don't go around with the crazy idea that nothing can exist unless it is capable of mathematical formulation.

Like the supernatural realm. That doesn't need any mathematical description does it? No spacetime geometry, no formulas to explain how it interacts with our natural 4-dimensional realm, no standard models to explain what Angels and Demons are made of, let alone God and his complex sentience.

 

[lesliedellow]

You can't say that for certain. But more to the point while it may be nearly impossible to experimentally confirm these conjectures they have a solid foundation for being possible scenarios. That's what I'm arguing.

I can say that. Any signal which can reach us must necessarily have originated in the same space-time manifold we occupy.

Really? What papers are they working on postulating the existence of a god?

Most of them are Christians, but not professional theologians, although some of them are. John Polkinghorne, for instance, has written many books about the relationship between science and religion.

Like the supernatural realm. That doesn't need any mathematical description does it? No spacetime geometry, no formulas to explain how it interacts with our natural 4-dimensional realm, no standard models to explain what Angels and Demons are made of, let alone God and his complex sentience.

So? I don't feel the need to try and nail everything down to the floor with a mathematical formula. If you do, that's your problem.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Physicists tend not to be on their safest ground when they start dabbling in metaphysics - and that is what speculation about what preceeded the big bang is.

Two other universes colliding to produce this one is just one such speculation. Of course, there is one possibility which the atheists amongst them are determined not to entertain.

Welcome to physics. Makes you miss the certainty of biology, doesn't it?

 

[Charbel7]

Have you ever stopped for a minute and thought logically about the Big Bang Theory? After all the Big Bang is a theory which means a human created it not a God/Creator and does not have any valid proof.

And if Atheists claim Supernatural is impossible so is the Big Bang Theory because in science there's something called Cause and Effect which means nothing can't come from nothing because it's just impossible for example : Can food be eaten by no one/nothing? Obviously not. Could the computer be created without engineers and scientists? Absolutely not. Can the universe be created without a creator/ Can the big bang occur without a cause? I will let you answer.

One can easily deny the fact that God exists however no matter how wise he is he must acknowledge that the Universe couldn't be created without a thing (I personally view God as a thing because it just ruins the whole idea of equality between Men and Women which is obviously a great and helpful idea to Humanity) causing it.

Nowadays it's almost impossible to know what religion is right because religion does not give the answers for everything so people stick more to Science in order to find answers.

People who say all religions are great to humanity are basically ignorant because :

Islam doesn't contribute to humanity in anyway (I studied Islam until it's last chapter in my few years of living) so i'm not saying something that isn't backed up with evidence. When the leader of Islam marries more than 80 women (I don't remember the exact amount), allows each and every man to marry 4 women and encourage Jihad (Fighting in the name of God) how can this religion possibly be good to humanity?

Why did i select Islam? No i'm not racist i just like to be honest and i've enough experience with Muslims.

Why didn't i criticize Christianity? Absolutely not because i believe in this religion it's just because i carefully read the bible and 70% percent of what was written there is possible in science. Does it mean i follow the bible word by word? No i don't because there are strange things that were added in the last century.

Why is Christianity possible while other religions aren't? Christianity is based on the Torah which explained to people who God is and predicted that God is going to send the Messiah to help Jews, When the messiah came (according to Christianity) he changed the whole view of Jews being superior, He basically said that all Humans are loved by God not a certain race. Both Judaism and Christianity are possible because you can simply call the Creator of Planet Earth "God" (Upper than anything because it created earth so it's technically upper than anything) and logically you can think that in the past thousands of years ago God did look after earth however after the people started doing everything against it, it turned it's back on them.

Again it's possible to oppose the whole idea of religion however you cannot deny the fact of the Universe Creator.

There's something i should mention - People often oppose the bible because it opposes Homosexuality. Science opposes 30% of what written in the bible while it completely opposes Homosexuality so people should stop confusing between wise people (wise atheists who do follow science) and atheists who have no logic.

The key and the answer is : Anatomy and History.

I'd like to hear your opinion about my reply and if you have anything against what i've said i'd like to hear why.

 

[Stellar Vision]

I can say that. Any signal which can reach us must necessarily have originated in the same space-time manifold we occupy.

You can say that if you're referring only to signals traveling between universes. Good thing we have indirect methods of empirical observation, much like our confirmation of W, Z, and Higgs bosons in the LHC by detecting the constituent particles they rapidly decay into, or indirect support for dark matter by analyzing the distribution of mass in the bullet cluster. With other universes it may or may not be the case that indications of a multiverse can be imprinted on the Cosmic Microwave Background; the math certainly doesn't preclude that.

Most of them are Christians, but not professional theologians, although some of them are. John Polkinghorne, for instance, has written many books about the relationship between science and religion.

I didn't ask about books on the relationship between science and religion, I asked about scientific papers postulating the existence of God, which they take absolutely seriously. But there are none, so you should've just admitted that and moved on.

So? I don't feel the need to try and nail everything down to the floor with a mathematical formula. If you do, that's your problem.

Well I'm not the one postulating such a supernatural God. If you get upset at scientists not entertaining your amorphous claims, that's your problem.

 

[lesliedellow]

You can say that if you're referring only to signals traveling between universes. Good thing we have indirect methods of empirical observation, much like our confirmation of W, Z, and Higgs bosons in the LHC by detecting the constituent particles they rapidly decay into, or indirect support for dark matter by analyzing the distribution of mass in the bullet cluster. With other universes it may or may not be the case that indications of a multiverse can be imprinted on the Cosmic Microwave Background; the math certainly doesn't preclude that.

You don't get it do you? It is quite simple really. If we can see (say) a star, then, by definition, that star is part of our universe. If we can detect a gravity wave, then that wave is part of our universe.

I didn't ask about books on the relationship between science and religion, I asked about scientific papers postulating the existence of God, which they take absolutely seriously. But there are none, so you should've just admitted that and moved on.

It is not the job of the PHYSICAL sciences to say anything about history, or politics, or geography or philosophy. As it happens it also have nothing to say about God, but that means nothing and proves nothing.

Well I'm not the one postulating such a supernatural God. If you get upset at scientists not entertaining your amorphous claims, that's your problem.

I couldn't give a sh*t what you believe. Your opinion means nothing to me.

 

[True Scotsman]

Again it's possible to oppose the whole idea of religion however you cannot deny the fact of the Universe Creator.

I can because of the fact of the primacy of existence, there can be no universe creator in the form of a consciousness which created everything, maintains everything and can alter anything by an act of conscious will.

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

I can because of the fact of the primacy of existence, there can be no universe creator in the form of a consciousness which created everything, maintains everything and can alter anything by an act of conscious will.

Unless the universe creator is actually composed of substance. Just like every other conscious being we know of.

What is present in the universe is the distinct lack of substance and presence of space. Space was "inflated" (contracted) within the original substance. Whirl of holographic (atomic) dust is left in the wake.

Atomic matter is only .0000000001 percent actual substance.

 

[iluvtheSims]

God said it and bang it happened!

 

[DogmaHunter]

You can not do that logically.

Why not? Does it interfere with your special pleading?

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

God said it and bang it happened!

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was "KABOOM"?

 

[iluvtheSims]

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was "KABOOM"?

LOL yup it was that simple He named it and claimed it

 

[PsychoSarah]

God said it and bang it happened!

You really think we haven't all heard that one before?