There was no "before" before the Big Bang

[Aman777]

Aman777 said: ↑
Since God lives in a world of total energy

Exactly where does it say that in the Bible? Or is it one more attempt by creationists to make Christianity look ridiculous by associating it with their pseudo scientific babble?

Notice where God lives:

1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the LIGHT which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

He lives in a world of Light/Energy as I posted. Amen?

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

It's funny how an atheist will support a completely speculative idea of the universe's beginning and yet deny God with every ounce of their intellect.

 

[lesliedellow]

Aman777 said: ↑
Since God lives in a world of total energy



Notice where God lives:

1Ti 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the LIGHT which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

He lives in a world of Light/Energy as I posted. Amen?

When Jesus said "I am the light of the world", did he mean to be taken literally - as in, we had no need for the Sun during the thirty or so years he was on Earth? The Bible is full of poetry and metaphors. It does not use the language of science; least of all twenty first century science.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

No, where you said this, silly, "Because they want an explanation which doesn't involve God, no matter how far outside the proper remit of science that takes them."

Or you don't really understand the scientific process, and this is merely your opinion?

Did you read the article to which he linked? It explicitly notes that it's purpose is to explore the idea of "creatio ex nihilo" without invoking God. It's precisely exemplary of what he claimed some people do.

 

[HitchSlap]

It's funny how an atheist will support a completely speculative idea of the universe's beginning and yet deny God with every ounce of their intellect.

If you're referring to me, who said I "supported" anything? What I support is the idea of the scientific method.
What I don't support is theists projecting their insecurities upon those doing actual science.

 

[Aman777]

So you reject mainstream theology just as much as you reject mainstream science. Good to know.

I, along with God, reject the traditions of men, which have led them to believe that there is One Truth for Science and another for Religion. God hid His Truth from men until the last days of this world:

Dan 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

God has hidden His Truth by placing it in front of the everyone's nose. God's Truth is the Supreme Truth which NO ancient man could have possibly understood. Only today, with the acquired knowledge of many centuries, are we beginning to understand Genesis. Look for God's Truth which agrees in every way with every other discovered Truth, no matter what Religion, which follows the traditions of ancient men, falsely teaches. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

When Jesus said "I am the light of the world", did he mean to be taken literally - as in, we had no need for the Sun during the thirty or so years he was on Earth? The Bible is full of poetry and metaphors. It does not use the language of science; least of all twenty first century science.

God's Truth is the Truth in every way. Jesus is Literally the Light of the first Day. He came forth from within the invisible Spirit of God into the physical world as the Light. This is simple to see when you read His words, just before His Crucifixion, in the Garden of Gethsemane.

Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou Me with thine own Self with the glory (Heb-brightness) which I had with Thee before the world was.

There was only ONE Day before the first world/firmament was made, on the 2nd Day. Jesus was there with the Father in His full glory, which is brighter than the Noonday Sun, Act 22:6 BEFORE Adam's world was made. His name in the O.T. is YHWH, translated "Lord God" in the KJV. Jesus IS Lord. Amen?

BTW, Jesus is also the Light of Heaven. Rev 21:23

 

[lesliedellow]

Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou Me with thine own Self with the glory (Heb-brightness) which I had with Thee before the world was.

The (Greek) word doxa there means what "glory" means in English. The idea is not that God shines like a light bulb. If light had been meant, the Greek word phos would have been used.

 

[HitchSlap]

I feel just fine about my beliefs, with or without atheists' woo woo.

Good. Woo should be avoided at all costs.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

those doing actual science.

You mean speculating.

 

[HitchSlap]

You mean speculating.

Nope. I mean science.

 

[HitchSlap]

I feel just fine about my beliefs, with or without atheists' woo woo.

Me too.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Nope. I mean science.

Let's spell 'speculation': S-C-I..


For not knowing how a black hole works, it's funny that one all of a sudden is an expert on the beginning singularity. That is not science, that is speculation.

 

[HitchSlap]

Let's spell 'speculation': S-C-I..


For not knowing how a black hole works, it's funny that one all of a sudden is an expert on the beginning singularity. That is not science, that is speculation.

Sorry, I don't follow. What's your point?

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

Sorry, I don't follow. What's your point?

If you don't know what goes on in a black hole, then you don't know what went on before the Big Bang, which includes 'nothing'. Therefore, it is speculative.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

If you don't know what goes on in a black hole, then you don't know what went on before the Big Bang, which includes 'nothing'. Therefore, it is speculative.

I'm also unclear on your point, here. The singularity at the event horizon of a black hole has nothing to do with the Big Bang singularity.

But, more importantly, cosmologists will be the first ones to point out that that models of the universe's origins are largely speculative. That does not imply that all of science is speculation, nor that speculative hypotheses about universal origin should be dismissed out-of-hand.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Um, excuse me, but quantum gravity is about developing a theory which unifies General Relativity and Quantum Field Theory. It has nothing to do with subatomic particles supposedly being unaffected by gravity.

Good try at a strawman.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity

"Quantum gravity (QG) is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to describe the force of gravity according to the principles of quantum mechanics."

Come on, you should know better by now to think I'll let you get by with such a disregard of science.

"Strictly speaking, the aim of quantum gravity is only to describe the quantum behavior of the gravitational field and should not be confused with the objective of unifying all fundamental interactions into a single mathematical framework. While any substantial improvement into the present understanding of gravity would aid further work towards unification, study of quantum gravity is a field in its own right with various branches having different approaches to unification."

No, you really should know by now Fairie Dust and strawmen will not be tolerated.

"Although a quantum theory of gravity is needed in order to reconcile general relativity with the principles of quantum mechanics, difficulties arise when one attempts to apply the usual prescriptions of quantum field theory to the force of gravity. From a technical point of view, the problem is that the theory one gets in this way is not renormalizable and therefore cannot be used to make meaningful physical predictions."

So as it stands it is completely worthless - except in the minds of people that ignore the forces that control the behavior of single particles.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Exactly where does it say that in the Bible? Or is it one more attempt by creationists to make Christianity look ridiculous by associating it with their pseudo scientific babble?

Quit making excuses.

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse."

And we do all understand what everything has been made from do we not????

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy

Again - told of 1,900 years before science had even dreamed everything was made from energy and would return to energy from which it came.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I will repeat what I said before. Why, if the question is meaningless, do we have atheist scientists indulging in unverifiable speculations, such as the big bang being the result of two branes colliding? Answer: Because they want an explanation which doesn't involve God, no matter how far outside the proper remit of science that takes them.

We actually agree. They want an explanation so badly which doesn't involve God, they are willing to disregard science and don't care how much Fairie Dust they have to shove in to make it happen.

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

Again - told of 1,900 years before science had even dreamed everything was made from energy and would return to energy from which it came.

Nothing in Romans 1 talks about Energy. Nor is it true that "everything was made from energy and would return to energy."

But, by all means, keep going. This is a really fascinating sort of nonsense that you're spewing.