Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Two Big Bangs?

How did the universe begin? The average evolutionist will immediately reply with “a big bang.” But that story might be changing (no surprise—evolutionary ideas change frequently, as we’ve documented time and time again!). A new hypothesis suggests the universe began not with a big bang—but with two big bangs, “one for ordinary matter and another delayed one for dark matter, originating from a separate form of energy.”

This new hypothesis is an attempt to answer “two cosmological mysteries”:

The first is understanding in detail how the Universe came into existence. The second is the nature of dark matter, a substance which is thought to be far more prevalent than all the stars and galaxies in the Universe.

Now, no one has observed this “dark matter”; rather, its existence is inferred based on some unusual phenomena in the heavens (you can read more about dark matter from a creation worldview in this article by astronomer Dr. Danny Faulkner). But how was this hypothetical matter created? Well, perhaps, according to these scientists, by a second big bang creating vacuum dark energy “which became the origin of dark matter.”

Reading through the popular science summary of this new hypothesis feels like reading through an explanation of the science fiction behind some new superhero movie! It reads exactly like fiction—one big bang produced energy which eventually, somehow, formed all the matter in the universe, and then maybe a month or so later, a second big bang created a different form of energy that formed a different kind of matter. It sounds like fiction because it is!

When I saw the headline reporting on this new paper, my first thought was that Christians who compromise God’s Word with the big bang will now have to modify the Bible again to fit a second big bang in somewhere! After all, the Bible doesn’t teach one big bang, let alone two!

Now, I have some Christians tell me, “The Bible does teach a big bang—God said, ‘Let there be . . .’ and bang, there was!” But the Bible doesn’t just say, “In the beginning, God created,” and then leave it up to our investigations and imaginations to fill in all the details. Rather, God gave us a detailed description of exactly how God created—by the power of his Word. God spoke, and it was . . . and everything appeared in the order God commanded it to. This is important because the big bang and the Bible contradict each other when it comes to the order of events:

More guess work from evolution scientists who want God out of the picture. Will they ever learn that they can't always get what they want?

[media=https://youtu.be/n-wAypUwvTc] This video has apo0logetics to think about. Be praying for you.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
The average evolutionist will immediately reply with “a big bang.”

Evolution has no interest in the origin of the universe, just as it has no interest in abiogenesis on this planet.

evolutionary ideas change frequently

Of course the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection changes... it's completely evidence-based. As new evidence is added the Theory itself is improved and further developed. That's simply how science works... surely you understand that. It's a large part of why science is so powerful and successful.

The Big Bang wasn't the beginning of the universe. It was the beginning of the expansion of the universe.... an expansion that brought spacetime into play.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
Evolution has no interest in the origin of the universe, just as it has no interest in abiogenesis on this planet.

Evolution has no interest in anything. it can't think let a lone have interest.

Of course the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection changes

You got that right. Scientists can't make up their minds which is true and which is false in science.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 science doesn't claim truth about anything.

Such flim-flam is more the domain of those seeking to deceive others... and themselves.

Science offers coherent, consistent, and complete explanations for demonstrable evidence.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
science doesn't claim truth about anything.

In other words, you're calling every scientist, including yourself, a liar. There are scientists who seek after the truth in science and recognize that it still points to God. Remember, God ordained science to benefit us and to show us His creation and how He's made it all work. Good day to you.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 Making false and supported claims that something is the truth is lying.

Science doesn't do that.

Science says' this is what we know so far, and we can demonstrate the evidence behind what we say. If the evidence changes we will amend what we say'.

Making an unsupported claim that something is the truth when there is no evidential basis for doing so... that's lying.

But then again, you already know that, right?

You know that, and yet you do it anyway.

How would you describe that sort of behaviour?
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
Making false and supported claims that something is the truth is lying.

So, stop doing it.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
Remember, God ordained science to benefit us and to show us His creation and how He's made it all work.
If that’s the case, why do you continue to deny and denounce it ? The Bible was written by primitive, uneducated, ignorant men. True science, comes not from religion, but the honest observation of facts and evidence which ( according to you ) was put there by god. It took a few centuries for the human race to evolve to a point where they could understand it. Since there are so many different religions, evidence is the best way to know just what god accomplished . You should embrace the truth, not deny it.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 I have never done it.

You, on the other hand...
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
You got that right. Scientists can't make up their minds which is true and which is false in science.
Which is why you should trust them more. They take the time to examine the data, they do not jump to conclusions, they follow the evidence. The only thing that can replace science, is better science . Your goat herders didn’t have any science. That’s why they believed the sun moved and the Earth didn’t.
You need to understand, that nothing is handed to us on a silver platter.
Knowledge and understanding come with time and patience. A loving god would want his children to grow. It takes a while.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
The Bible was written by primitive, uneducated, ignorant men.

Prove it.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
I have never done it.

Sure you have, every time you've been on here.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 "Making false and unsupported claims that something is the truth is lying"

"I have never done that"

Sure you have, every time you've been on here

If so, it will be a simple matter for you to show examples of that.
Please feel free to do so now.
In fact, I insist.
Go ahead
DocSavage · M
@newjaninev2
If he was able to provide evidence of any of his claims, he probably wouldn’t be a Christian.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
Prove what ?
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 "Making false and unsupported claims that something is the truth is lying"

"I have never done that"

Sure you have, every time you've been on here

If so, it will be a simple matter for you to show examples of that.
Please feel free to do so now.
In fact, I insist.
Go ahead

_________________________

you and your magical entity certainly do a lot of running away....
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@newjaninev2
"Making false and unsupported claims that something is the truth is lying"

Prove This claim of yours to be true, @newjaninev2.
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@GodSpeed63 "Making false and unsupported claims that something is the truth is lying"

"I have never done that"

Sure you have, every time you've been on here

If so, it will be a simple matter for you to show examples of that.
Please feel free to do so now.
In fact, I insist.
Go ahead

_________________________

you and your magical entity certainly do a lot of running away....

_________________________

It appears you cannot show examples of that.
It appears you knowingly and wilfully invent convenient fictions whenever it suits your purpose.

That makes you a...
@GodSpeed63 Religion changes, too. Your concept of a personal relationship with Jesus isn’t in the Bible. It was devised by German Pietists in the 17th century. Same for your belief that Jesus died for your sins. Your particular form of worship probably dates back no more than a century, if that.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
Do you believe god could write such a piece of crap like the Bible ?
Page one, chapter one. The earth is flat, the sun and the stars move around it, and there’s a big ass dome over the whole thing.
You figure god would know the truth.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
She said making false claims is called lying. What’s to prove ?
You have another definition?
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@LeopoldBloom @DocSavage @newjaninev2
Religion changes, too. Your concept of a personal relationship with Jesus isn’t in the Bible.

Prove what you say is true.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
Why ? You said proof is self evident. You assume we’ve seen your’s . Read your bible, if it’s there, you point it out.
GodSpeed63 · 61-69, M
@DocSavage
You said proof is self evident. You assume we’ve seen yours .

You have seen the evidence for God over and over and over and over again.
DocSavage · M
@GodSpeed63
Then why can’t you tell us what it is ? What do you think we’re doing playing 20 questions ?
You’ve seen the evidence for evolution, tell us what part you don’t understand, and we can bring up examples. Why can’t you do it ?
@DocSavage He's going to quote the old Romans 1:20-21 "they have no excuse" verse.

"Lookit that beautiful sunset. You gonna tell me God don't exist after seeing that?"
@GodSpeed63 Yes, we know, Romans 1:20-21. The problem is, goddidit isn't a valid explanation. You need to explain how goddidit. Explain the specific mechanism whereby a disembodied intellect (something we've never observed directly) can affect material reality. "He just did" isn't an answer.

What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.