Big bang theory dismissed

[PeteC-UK]

Hi Folks..

Daemon; Hmmm...I dont know anything about the "Descartes crowd" - so I will run off and look them up in a bit..lol...but for sure I will say frankly - I base my posts here on first, direct experiences - and second the teachngs of Christ as those direct personal experiences verify all that He revealed as being legitimate truth...Of course I wont know for sure til the day this mortal body dies - but it really does look like He knew what He was speaking about and my direct experiences as said, are fully mutually supported by Him and His original teaching - like He tells me what to expect - and sure enough, it happens to actually be the exact way He describes it...

I have directly experienced MYSELF as existing without any body or form - just as His teaching predictedt - and so when He then also tells us of how the ENTIRE creation first happens - I have no reason to doubt Him and every reason to trust Him based on the truths He already personally provides..He shows us directly how to take this individual mind - right back into a state of "none existance" which then literally allows the mind to become free from the mundane world ENTIRELY....We encounter our ESSENCE directly BEFORE it has created any form or structure to inhabit or identify it Self with...

Having experienced that state directly, it becomes very easy to understand Him when He says the Father mind operates in an IDENTICAL process of Self Creation...To the mind - it has ALWAYS existed - it is the STATE OF SELF AWARENESS itself...There can NEVER be a "time" when the mind was not Self aware - do you see..?...As soon as the mind BECOMES Self aware, TIME itself begins to flow...

The flow of that which we call time - IS the the state of Self awareness itself - no seperation..."Time" began when this mind first "woke up" - but dont be expecting the EXPERIENCE of that time flow to "universal" or even to be comparable to THIS flow of mortal time - for simply time is a product of mind and Self awareness - and so the greater the mind Present the greater the difference will be compared to our mortal standard..

Time - starts with MIND - as all things do - and is fully and intricately tied to SELF PERCEPTION and focus WITHIN the mind..YOUR time is NOT the same as my time - or anybody elses - even though they all occur at the SAME time regulated into minutes and seconds - how we EXPERIENCE it is entirely a unique Self created event - and that is because as said - it is always the domain of a MIND - all existance is IMAGINARY

 

[jeager106]

Everyone knows that all that exists to us humans is a mere drop on a slide under a microscope
being examined by some mad scientist.

 

[jeager106]

By the way.............................who or what dismissed the theory?
A theory is, after all, just a theory.
Special Creation is just a theory based upon what was written thousands of
years ago when mankind had no notion of science.
Everything that existed in nature was credited to some entity that man didn't
understand.
When crops failed and starvation was coming people prayed for rain or
sacrificed victims to appease the gods, and.......................................
Well you get it.

 

[Revoltingest]

I must not have made sense to you.
But honestly we do know...and it can be proven.

You asked a lot of hard questions.
But merely asking doesn't debunk anything.
The BB Theory has a good foundation, predictive value, & evidence.
No other theory works as well.
Is it hard to understand, & raise many questions?
Yes.
Instead of being problematic, we're fortunate that there's so much more to be discovered.
This is so much more powerful & interesting than the simplistic "God did it".

 

[YmirGF]

Quick question.

How could the big bang theory....
Be considered as a possible explanation for "existence" , when in order for the BB to occurr, It , itself would have had to existed, whether it "existed" solely as itself,within itself, Somewhere else, nowhere else, Or not.

And to make it clear,
How could " whatever it's component are made of come to be? Were they always there? Or were they "born" ?
How were they born? A sexually perhaps?

But
How could they have created themselves when "what was created", before it's creation hadn't "existed"

If it always "existed", why would "it" after a seemingly eternal "existence" not be able to contain itself suddenly...and explode creating the universe and everything in it which obviously is Never going to not existt?..and which obviously goes on forever.

Not that I should even touch on this...
When it's the eternal itself that causes people to create a creation theorry to begin with....and ironically also proove how existence was made possible...

Whats the matter? Doesn't make sense?


If matter cannot be created or destroyed.....

How did the matter get there?

Ohhh it was always there......and it'll always be there .....

Using a freaking scientists therum to show how funny we are... Lol
So" it" will always be there in one form or another...
And the non physical heavens....are not going anywhere...and will always exist...
Expounding infinitly ..

So basically the heavens, or the universe,..according to human logic...as you can see...demonstrate to us.... by the power God has..the existence of the unfathomable...explainable only by the way of God....eternal power that is proof and sign that God is real.....

Oh and if you read the book of Romans chapter one....verses 19 and 20....

Along with Psalm 19:1

You will see that I am not the only one who's thought about this....

Amen?
......

Hope I didn't get sidetracked and that this made sense.

Because I'm eager to proceed to my next lesson....

"The "nature" of God"

I'm always struck by the idea that one man's "deep thinking" is akin to another man's "superficial pond skimming".
This piece might be impressive to those with double-digit IQ's.

 

[Revoltingest]

This piece might be impressive to those with double-digit IQ's.

No, I'm unimpressed.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

How could the big bang theory....
Be considered as a possible explanation for "existence" , when in order for the BB to occurr, It , itself would have had to existed, whether it "existed" solely as itself,within itself, Somewhere else, nowhere else, Or not.

Do you feel "god" gets a free pass over such questions? Where did god come from? How did god get there? How did god create itself? If matter cannot be created or destroyed, how did it get there?
Now, as for the Big Bang, plenty of scientists do feel that was only the beginning of our own universe, but not everything in existence that is. We can also see things to support the theory, such as microwave radiation and cosmic bodies moving outwards. For god, we have nothing but the philosophical realm of metaphysics.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

The Big Bang theory is not an explanation of why things exist; that's not what physics is about. Nor can it mark a beginning, even in the context of physics.

To extrapolate from observations of the universe back to the Big Bang, we need three assumptions:
1. The "laws of nature" do not vary with place.
2. They do not vary with time.
3. Any physical event can be explained by a previous physical event.
Note that these are assumptions: they are not discoveries made by physics, but the rules of the game. The first two are, of course unprovable: that's why they are assumptions.

The third is actually false, even if materialists think otherwise, but it's a necessary assumption if you are going to do physics: you can't keep looking over your shoulder for non-physical explanations. But it has a consequence in this context. The Big Bang is a physical event: therefore it must be explicable in terms of a previous one! That's why physics doesn't deal with the origin of the cosmos: any event recognised by physics cannot be a first event.

As for conflict between the Big Bang theory and religion, even Christianity, it doesn't exist. If physics is not about explaining the origin of the cosmos, then equally religion is not about describing how it works. Incidentally, the theory was originated by Monsignor George Lemaître - a priest!

 

[George-ananda]

I believe some kind of Big Bang occurred; but why there was matter/energy for such a thing has not been answered by science. Creation ex-nihilo is still a mystery to science. Personally, I believe this is all a creative thought/play/drama of God/Brahman. My beliefs are beyond where mainstream science has reached, and comes from those many who I believe have experienced consciousness beyond our normal reality. The universe is consciousness at creative play.

 

[metis]

The Big Bang theory is not an explanation of why things exist; that's not what physics is about. Nor can it mark a beginning, even in the context of physics.

To extrapolate from observations of the universe back to the Big Bang, we need three assumptions:
1. The "laws of nature" do not vary with place.
2. They do not vary with time.
3. Any physical event can be explained by a previous physical event.
Note that these are assumptions: they are not discoveries made by physics, but the rules of the game. The first two are, of course unprovable: that's why they are assumptions.

The third is actually false, even if materialists think otherwise, but it's a necessary assumption if you are going to do physics: you can't keep looking over your shoulder for non-physical explanations. But it has a consequence in this context. The Big Bang is a physical event: therefore it must be explicable in terms of a previous one! That's why physics doesn't deal with the origin of the cosmos: any event recognised by physics cannot be a first event.

As for conflict between the Big Bang theory and religion, even Christianity, it doesn't exist. If physics is not about explaining the origin of the cosmos, then equally religion is not about describing how it works. Incidentally, the theory was originated by Monsignor George Lemaître - a priest!

First of all, because of what we know about quantum mechanics, which is granted very little, the laws of physics definitely does vary between mega-matter and sub-atomic particles. Also, many cosmologists think that the laws of physics in different parts of our universe, may vary as well (read some of Leonard Susskind's works on that).

Secondly, how in the world could you possibly tell that the laws of physics haven't varied in time? Are you that old?

Thirdly, most cosmologists do agree that it is likely some other actions preceded the BB, and most of them think that the entire process likely goes back to infinity, which is only slightly older than I am.

And finally, a theistic causation begs questions such as what supposedly caused the deity or deities, how many are there, how can anyone determine that they have anything to do with "creation", are they ever-changing or not, and finally how does one know with any certainty that one or more even exist to begin with?

 

[Scott Russell]

Absolutely Amazing

 

[Valjean]

Your premise is wrong.

 

[Sunstone]

What an absolutely fascinating OP! It's almost just as if somewhere deep down buried inside the OP's word salad there lurked at least one coherent thought! Almost as if!

 

[jeager106]

Well once again the Creation story was written for people of that time period
with NO notion of what science even was.
It's a nice, romantic story.
That said the story of Creation we find in biblical writings does not validate
science nor does it makes scientific theory wrong.
Who is to say the B B wasn't the method some powerful creator chose to
bring things into existence?
Heck if I know.
Or........did the B B cause a creator that created our planet and life forms?
Was evolution the method some superior intelligence chose to create us humans?
Did a "smart" ape breed other smart apes and call them liberals?
Oh, Oh! I'm gonna catch it for writing that!
(when one has no idea what one is talking about distract the audience with nonsense)

 

[Revoltingest]

Well once again the Creation story was written for people of that time period
with NO notion of what science even was.
It's a nice, romantic story.
That said the story of Creation we find in biblical writings does not validate
science nor does it makes scientific theory wrong.
Who is to say the B B wasn't the method some powerful creator chose to
bring things into existence?
Heck if I know.
Or........did the B B cause a creator that created our planet and life forms?
Was evolution the method some superior intelligence chose to create us humans?
Did a "smart" ape breed other smart apes and call them liberals?
Oh, Oh! I'm gonna catch it for writing that!
(when one has no idea what one is talking about distract the audience with nonsense)

I've been saying the same thing for years.
You won't catch hell.....you'll be lucky to even get a response from some loser.

 

[McBell]

Wow this guy's great, he;s already got Mestemia reading the Bible!!

*yawn*
I would wager to bet that I have read the Bible more than you.
I would also wager to bet I have read the Bible for comprehension more than you.

I submit your posts as evidence.

 

[jeager106]

*yawn*
I would wager to bet that I have read the Bible more than you.
I would also wager to bet I have read the Bible for comprehension more than you.

I submit your posts as evidence.

@Mestemia

And just to whom are you addressing?

 

[McBell]

@Mestemia

And just to whom are you addressing?

I thought it pretty obvious that post is in reply to Lyndon

 

[jeager106]

I thought it pretty obvious that post is in reply to Lyndon

Whewwwww. Thanks!

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Also, many cosmologists think that the laws of physics in different parts of our universe, may vary...
...how in the world could you possibly tell that the laws of physics haven't varied in time?

Did you not read my whole post: the use of the word "assumption"? Obviously we cannot know that the behaviour of matter doesn't vary with time or space, and there have been physicists who have questioned both. But if you drop the first assumption, you loose cosmology and stellar astronomy. If you drop the second, it cuts out much historical geology. If you drop both, then no Big Bang.