There was no "before" before the Big Bang

[Justatruthseeker]

You are factually wrong. Theist scientists have speculated on how the big bang started without including God.

No - just allowed those who choose to ignore Him to do so, and to prevent familiarity with a God that has been hidden since the beginning.

"“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”"

But at the same time revealed by the understanding of those things that were made.

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."

So let's at least be consistent with what the creator of the Big Bang theory believed, being a Theist and all.

They may choose to not believe - but by doing so they are ignoring the understanding of what has been made - making excuses. A believer may also believe - he just may not attempt to think he can truly describe a God that no image can be made of. If an image could be made of God - He could be described. Just as you could describe what energy "was" if you could make an image of it. But you can't do that either, because no image can be made of it.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

I still don't understand how nothing turns into something. It makes zero sense. So something...er... nothing?!? the size of nothing exploding from nothing into something and formed LOTS of nothing beyond what we can imagine. At least when you add a Creator it would make more sense because He can create things from nothing (as He did). Though some say "Well who created Him then?" or "Where was He if nothing was around?". But thats thinking from a human view point. Just like from a human viewpoint we understand time. Especially when it comes to our bodies. We know we live and die. Time is a thing. But to some things time may not be anything. As in the case of God. To him 1,000 years is but a blink.

As for who created Him. He just has always existed. Again we are looking at from our human POV. Space, time, mass....it didn't exist until He brought it into being. Lets imagine you just woke up and you were a god. You could create everything. Would you ask who created you (assuming nothing existed at the time you woke up)? Of course not. But again, we can't even answer that question because it doesn't make sense with our human minds. We would wonder "How can you suddenly wake up? How did you come into being?". We don't understand anything really. As for where was He if nothing existed. Well currently we cannot see God (in a literal sense) right? So this would mean Hes not in our spectrum of what we can see. Maybe Hes in another dimension. Maybe Hes invisible to us. Maybe Hes invisible to everything. Maybe time and space aren't even a place He exists. For all we know the universe fits is a tiny ball sitting in the ball of HIs hand. Again from a human stand point it makes no sense because its beyond our understanding. Just like explaining quantum mechanics to a 3 year old is beyond their understanding. But we don't want to think of it like we are almost babies because it means there is something smarter then us, something that is beyond what we are. We don't like not having total control or knowing something else may matter more then ourselves.

It wasn't nothing. It was Energy/Mind/Consciousness/knowledge. He has indeed always existed. Just as energy has always existed.

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

In physics, energy is a property of objects which can be transferred to other objects or converted into different forms, but cannot be created or destroyed."

It is that in which image we were made. The first image was the knowledge of good. Then we partook of the knowledge of evil which could not be contained without His help. It is that knowledge that made us like unto God.

Genesis 3:22 "And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil."

It was that act of knowing that made us in His image. God is pure Energy/Mind/Consciousness/Knowledge.

Hence His son is the Word - as embodying an idea (knowledge).

http://biblehub.com/greek/3056.htm

"logos: a word (as embodying an idea), a statement, a speech"

He is all around us and in us and from His very substance was the universe made.

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

"In physics, energy is a property of objects which can be transferred to other objects or converted into different forms, but cannot be created or destroyed."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter
"Still, special relativity shows that matter may disappear by conversion into energy, even inside closed systems, and it can also be created from energy, within such systems. However, because mass (like energy) can neither be created nor destroyed, the quantity of mass and the quantity of energy remain the same during a transformation of matter (which represents a certain amount of energy) into non-material (i.e., non-matter) energy. This is also true in the reverse transformation of energy into matter."

 

[Justatruthseeker]

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

{ad-hominem remark removed - does not address the issues being discussed}.

What is your definition of power?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(physics)

"In physics, power is the rate of doing work."

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

"The "ability of a system to perform work" is a common description"

"In physics, energy is a property of objects which can be transferred to other objects or converted into different forms, but cannot be created or destroyed."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter
"Still, special relativity shows that matter may disappear by conversion into energy, even inside closed systems, and it can also be created from energy, within such systems. However, because mass (like energy) can neither be created nor destroyed, the quantity of mass and the quantity of energy remain the same during a transformation of matter (which represents a certain amount of energy) into non-material (i.e., non-matter) energy. This is also true in the reverse transformation of energy into matter."

It's what every theorist believes - that only energy existed and then it magically one day decided to go bang for some unknown reason. Which dispels the notion of no prior beginning before the big bang - since energy has always existed - before it decided to go bang magically.

So we see science disagrees with you.

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

"After the initial expansion, the universe cooled sufficiently to allow the formation of subatomic particles, and later simple atoms. Giant clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity to form stars and galaxies."

So not even subatomic particles or atoms existed in the beginning.

 

[lesliedellow]

What is your definition of power?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(physics)

Quit making excuses.

Romans 1:20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature"

<Staff Edit> So when we speak about the power of thought, or the power of an empire, we are talking about something which is measured in joules per second, are we?

I suppose that helps to explain how come, "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the LIGHT which no man can approach unto" is referring to something which can be measured in lumens.

When Paul wrote, a technical definition of power as the rate of energy consumption hadn't even been dreamt of. It is certainly not what the Greek word δυναμος means.

"Oh, but the Bible's ultimate author is God, and he was wanting to give us a physics lesson."

 

[Aman777]

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.

Did God the Holy Spirit lead you to that conclusion? At the end of time, the Sun will be darkened and the Moon shall be as blood when Jesus, Who blinded Saul on the road to Damascus will appear:

Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.

It will be really dark when Jesus returns and every eye will see Him because He is brighter than the Noonday Sun. Act 22:6 Do you have any idea what Jesus looked like in the Old Testament?

 

[lesliedellow]

Do you have any idea what Jesus looked like in the Old Testament?

I am sure you do. You were doubtless there.

 

[Black Dog]

No - just allowed those who choose to ignore Him to do so, and to prevent familiarity with a God that has been hidden since the beginning.

"“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”"

But at the same time revealed by the understanding of those things that were made.

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."

So let's at least be consistent with what the creator of the Big Bang theory believed, being a Theist and all.

They may choose to not believe - but by doing so they are ignoring the understanding of what has been made - making excuses. A believer may also believe - he just may not attempt to think he can truly describe a God that no image can be made of. If an image could be made of God - He could be described. Just as you could describe what energy "was" if you could make an image of it. But you can't do that either, because no image can be made of it.

That's a lot of assertions. Do you have any actual evidence to support them?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

{ad-hominem attacks removed} So when we speak about the power of thought, or the power of an empire, we are talking about something which is measured in joules per second, are we?

I suppose that helps to explain how come, "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the LIGHT which no man can approach unto" is referring to something which can be measured in lumens.

When Paul wrote, a technical definition of power as the rate of energy consumption hadn't even been dreamt of. It is certainly not what the Greek word δυναμος means.

"Oh, but the Bible's ultimate author is God, and he was wanting to give us a physics lesson."

If you knew what it said you wouldn't be confused. That light that they dwell in is Power - energy. Paul may not have known - but God who directed his writing certainly knew what Power was - since He is indeed energy. Make all the excuses you want to ignore that eternal Power. tell me - what else besides energy do you know of that is eternal?????

That's what I thought.

but let's get back to what you ignored.

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...ore-the-big-bang.7916279/page-8#post-68846106

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.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

That's a lot of assertions. Do you have any actual evidence to support them?

You were informed that by the very author of the Big Bang himself - a Theist. But I am sure you understood what he meant better than he did himself - right????

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Did God the Holy Spirit lead you to that conclusion? At the end of time, the Sun will be darkened and the Moon shall be as blood when Jesus, Who blinded Saul on the road to Damascus will appear:

Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see Him, and they also which pierced Him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of Him. Even so, Amen.

It will be really dark when Jesus returns and every eye will see Him because He is brighter than the Noonday Sun. Act 22:6 Do you have any idea what Jesus looked like in the Old Testament?

they don't want to hear the truth is all.

Revelation 1:16 "in his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance."

Matthew 17:2 "There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light."

 

[DogmaHunter]

You were informed that by the very author of the Big Bang himself - a Theist. But I am sure you understood what he meant better than he did himself - right????

LeMaitre would be quite upset with you.

He sure was upset with the pope when the pope tried to use his scientific model of physics to make a religious point.

 

[SkyWriting]

If God didn't need a cause, why did the universe?

Our current universe is subject to "time". This is likely a "countdown mechanism" just for us.
It comes with "cause and effect" built into it.

 

[SkyWriting]

Quoting the Bible, written by people who thought the sun revolves around the earth, is irrelevant to science.

You use the term sunrise and sunset....as if the sun really rises and sets.
You don't look any smarter from a historical perspective by not updating
your language.

 

[Aman777]

I am sure you do. You were doubtless there.

Here is God's Image in the Old Testament:

Eze 1:27 And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of His loins even upward, and from the appearance of His loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about.
Eze 1:28 As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

You don't have to be there when you can read the Holy Spirit's Word on the events. Amen?

 

[Aman777]

they don't want to hear the truth is all.

Revelation 1:16 "in his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance."

Matthew 17:2 "There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light."

Amen. It's Jesus from beginning until the end, the ONLY God ever formed physically or that ever will be formed physically. Jesus is Lord to the glory of God the Father. God Bless you

 

[Truthfrees]

MOD HAT ON

1. Please discuss the topic, not each other. Discussing each other is considered flaming.

2. Please be respectful of each other's character and beliefs. No goading please.

If your post is missing or edited it is for these reasons.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

What is your definition of power?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(physics)

"In physics, power is the rate of doing work."

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

"The "ability of a system to perform work" is a common description"

You realize that even by the definitions you've given, here, Power and Energy are two entirely different things. Even if I were to grant the preposterous assertion that δυναμος refers to the modern definition of Power found in Physics textbooks, you would STILL be wrong to claim that Romans 1:20 talks about God living in a world of Energy.

It's what every theorist believes - that only energy existed and then it magically one day decided to go bang for some unknown reason.

That's certainly not "what every theorist believes." It's a Straw Man based on a common misconception about the Big Bang.

So not even subatomic particles or atoms existed in the beginning.

What's your point? Did someone here assert that they did?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

LeMaitre would be quite upset with you.

He sure was upset with the pope when the pope tried to use his scientific model of physics to make a religious point.

You best go reread. He was upset with the Pope because the Pope was claiming God could be understood because of the theory - was familiarizing God - when as Lemaitre' said - God has been hidden since the beginning according to Isiah, so pretending to be able to explain fully what God was - was violating scripture and science.

Stop taking the words of blog sites over what he really said.

Because let's face it - he remained a devote believer all of his life - despite your "claims" his theory was against religion. He wanted his theory to stand on scientific merits alone - without the need for his religious beliefs.

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8847
"Statements such as these contradicted Lemaître's own strict distinction between the tools for investigating matters of science and matters of theology. "He realized quite fully the tentative and hypothetical character of scientific theories and for this reason alone, if for no others, opposed the use of such theories to support philosophical, theological or faith statements." As a result, Professor Lemaître wanted his scientific theories to be judged exclusively on their physical merit, keeping metaphysical implications completely separate."

He rejected all your claims as a matter of fact.

"Should a priest reject relativity because it contains no authoritative exposition on the doctrine of the Trinity? Once you realize that the Bible does not purport to be a textbook of science, the old controversy between religion and science vanishes . . . The doctrine of the Trinity is much more abstruse than anything in relativity or quantum mechanics; but, being necessary for salvation, the doctrine is stated in the Bible. If the theory of relativity had also been necessary for salvation, it would have been revealed to Saint Paul or to Moses . . . As a matter of fact neither Saint Paul nor Moses had the slightest idea of relativity."

His faith remained just as strong - he simply separated what was required for salvation from what wasn't.

He understood God has been hidden since the beginning - although he knows not one thing has been done without God, simply that God can not be reduced to a scientific hypothesis - because miracles can not be explained by science.

"He (the Christian researcher) knows that not one thing in all creation has been done without God, but he knows also that God nowhere takes the place of his creatures. Omnipresent divine activity is everywhere essentially hidden. It never had to be a question of reducing the supreme Being to the rank of a scientific hypothesis."

He also stated: "The Spirit knew perfectly the Universe, his work."

Even he understood that image we were made in was knowledge.

"We cannot end this rapid review which we have made together of the most magnificent subject that the human mind may be tempted to explore without being proud of these splendid endeavors of Science in the conquest of the Earth, and also without expressing our gratitude to One Who has said: "I am the Truth," One Who gave us the mind to understand him and to recognize a glimpse of his glory in our universe which he has so wonderfully adjusted to the mental power with which he has endowed us."

He totally supported a faith-based approach.

"Both of them (the scientist-believer and the scientist-nonbeliever) attempt at decoding the palimpsest of nature with multiple imbrications in which the traces of the various stages of the world's lengthy evolution has been overlapped and blended. The believer perhaps has an advantage of knowing that the riddle possesses a solution, that the underlying writing finally comes from an intelligent being, and consequently that the problem proposed by nature has been posed in order to be solved, therefore, that its degree of difficulty is presumably measurable with the present and future capacities of humanity."

And when science advances enough to finallly understand the things made - mankind's excuses will finally all fall away.

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."

 

[Justatruthseeker]

If God didn't need a cause, why did the universe?

Because your science says it requires a beginning. Are you claiming it was a miracle and needs no justification since science can not explain miracles? I would certainly agree with you then.

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

 

[Boxing Pythagoras]

Because your science says it requires a beginning.

No, it doesn't.