• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

the bible and the big bang.

J

johannes

Member
unfotunayely i can only place a small amout of this writing here at this stage;

Let us now discuss these days.
We will give you the Hebrew meaning of the relevant words.

Day 1Gen 1:1in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

*The conclusion is that he created two separate “places” namely: a spiritual place and a physical place or an invisible place and a visible place.




Verse 2; and the earth was without form and void.

Void meaning: to be empty, hollow, vacuity, emptiness, tremble inward, palpitate, suddenly agitated, glisten, shining (white or red marble) a ruin.
*From this we can conclude: it was a vacuity that became unstable/agitated/the gathering of waste. We can probably say that the vacuity was “sucking in” the tiny visible components of the universe.
Without form: waste or desolation – worthless.
*The “earth” at that stage was without form because of the instability, the palpitation, and the agitation of this matter creating an abyss, a hurricane, or a tornado. (See spirit below)
Also it became worthless. We discuss this in another chapter.

Verse 2 cont: and darkness was upon the face of the deep
Darkness: (Hebrew meaning;) enhanced darkness, misery, destruction, death, sorrow, dark night, and obscurity.
*Enhanced darkness = to become more and more visible/fossilized.
*This gathering of matter became more and more dense, obscured and visible (not transparent) we can conclude that the visible is called darkness a place of misery and sorrow.
Face: the part that turns namely these “turning” masses that gathered.

Deep: an abyss, a surging mass, to make an uproar, to agitate greatly, destroy, move, make a noise, to ring again, a pat
*This describes a boiling mass reaching a point of explosion, making great noise/an uproar. (it will be impossible for us to even imagine or describe this noise.)
If we now rephrase the following; darkness was on the face of the deep, we could perhaps read it as follow; this turning abyss became more and more visible, but did not had any specific form yet, logically.

Verse 2 cont.: and the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters
Spirit: (Hebrew) wind, breath, air, anger, smell, violent, by resemblance spirit or a tempest. The meaning of spirit in the New Testament hasn’t the same meaning.
*This violent tempest/hurricane is called the spirit of God. This tempest was a result of this turning abyss.
Face: the part that turns (the abyss)
Water: the meaning of water in this respect is; a fountain or an eye, which clearly describes this turning boiling/whirlpool masses. We are used to call the center of a hurricane the eye.

Verse 3: and God said, let there be light. And there was light

This violent tempest, this turning boiling mass, called spirit, exploded. This describes the so-called Big Bang of 20 billion years ago.
Light: to set on fire, to cause or make luminous.
This “abyss”, this turning tower of masses, fell over from north to south and “burst open” in the midst according to the bible.
You now may argue and say that The Spirit of God is not a tempest. My friend, God has more than “one side” and has different “powers”. In fact the bible says God has 7 different spirits. This is discussed in detail in another chapter.
 
Mike182

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Welcome to the forum!

the specific part of the forum you put this thread under in new age belief, under neopagan and revival religions. because this thread is about science and the Bible, i'm going to move it to the science vs religion forum.

on a seperate note, you might be interested to read an article i wrote over a year ago on this very subject, feel free to post comments at the end of it :)

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31974
 
joeboonda

joeboonda

Well-Known Member
That is not the same as the Big Bang Theory. With the Big Bang, there is the bang and the stars are made and then earth, and then us. With the Bible, the sun, moon, and stars are not formed until the 4th day. There is no relationship to this theory and the creation, its just a theory. Interesting is that they say all matter was condensed into a space the size of a period then, boom it explodes, whatever. I can more easily believe an almighty God spoke it into existence, but to each their own.
 
J

johannes

Member
joeboonda; your quote;{Interesting is that they say all matter was condensed into a space the size of a period then, boom it explodes, whatever. I can more easily believe an almighty God spoke it into existence, but to each their own.}
you might be surprised to know that after the words let there be light we read in Gen 1:6; god said; let there be a firmament.... the word firmament has the meaning of; an expantion, to pound the earth, to expand, to make broad, strech and to spread with thin layers.
i would therefore rather believe what the bible say instead of our own intellect or what the science say, but if you compare this with science it seems to me as if it is the same thing. i have a formula and if that is correct, the universe expanded by 490 times its previous size. johan.
 
D

des

Active Member
I don't think that Genesis is describing the real creation event, nor are they thinking of this in the same way as scientists (at least scientists in our day). (Science and many other areas including theology were lumped together for the ancients.) They are using their imaginations to figure out how things could have happened and how we could be in the state we are now. How were things created and so on. These are big questions. I don't think the ancient writers had the knowledge to understand all that. Any apparent correlation in language is in the eye of the reader.

I think that Genesis 1 is quite beautiful as poetic language, but we see it clearly as poetic in that Light comes before even the sun is created. There is no way one could read this as any kind of 'big bang' event. Some modern readers take the six days to mean six epochs or somesuch. I think even this is too literal. There is no reason to believe that the ancients thought in the same more or less dualistic ways that we do now-- this is "real" this is "not real". I think that myth was accepted as part of life/living. I think some Native American groups will say of myth that it didn't really happen but it is true anyway.

By myth I don't mean lie or falsehood, perhaps I should use the word mythos. It is a story or idea that has/had explanatory and social power.
Actually the term "Big Bang" shares in some mythos. Sound doesn't happen in the vacuum of space, so there is no reason to think there was a literate bang. Still the concept of the singularity expanding is not in the same league as Genesis, as it can in some ways be shown true (or not) in the laboratory. The term "Big Bang" shows we are not immune to the need for myth either.

I also don't think Genesis has anything to say about modern physics, but I also think that modern physics doesn't rule out God either.


--des
 
Searching

Searching

Member
johannes said:
did you know the bible describes the big bang?
Click to expand...
I don't think so.

Seems to me that the big bang theory is more science's attempt to explain the creation of the universe, rather than the Biblical creation story describing the big bang.

Makes for interesting discussion though, I suppose.
 
J

johannes

Member
Des; your quote;{ ; I don't think that Genesis is describing the real creation event,}
Well dont you then accept the bible as true?

Your quote;{ They are using their imaginations to figure out how things could have happened and how we could be in the state we are now. How were things created and so on. These are big questions. I don't think the ancient writers had the knowledge to understand all that.}
Then you sugget that is wasn’t the spirit of God speakinh through these people?

Your quote;{ Sound doesn't happen in the vacuum of space, so there is no reason to think there was a literate bang}
I fully agree with you, the bang is just to explain the action I suppose.

Your quote;{ Searching; Seems to me that the big bang theory is more science's attempt to explain the creation of the universe, rather than the Biblical creation story describing the big bang.}

Yes, the bible only describes it as a summary you could say, but that is why there are scientists to maybe explain it better. Thanks for your remarks. Johan.


 
Mike182

Mike182

Flaming Queer
johannes said:
Well dont you then accept the bible as true?

Then you sugget that is wasn’t the spirit of God speakinh through these people?
Click to expand...


hey johannes, just to let you know, a lot of people on this forum do not see the bible as authoritative - this is not a Christian forum, it's a multi-faith forum :)
I fully agree with you, the bang is just to explain the action I suppose.
Click to expand...


actually, going off the bill bryson book "a short history of nearly everything", he describes the big bang as "a sudden expansion of all matter on a whooping scale."
Yes, the bible only describes it as a summary you could say, but that is why there are scientists to maybe explain it better. Thanks for your remarks. Johan.
Click to expand...

i disagree here, while some scientists and researchers may take an interest in comparing modern scientific thought to biblical revelations, science is not here to substantiate religious claims. Religious claims to truth are based on fundamental assumptions that, in the eyes of the scientist, are unjusitifed assumptions.

i have a formula and if that is correct, the universe expanded by 490 times its previous size. johan.
Click to expand...

now this is controversial, what formula hast thou got to show us?

Mike
 
XAAX

XAAX

Active Member
johannes said:
Day 1Gen 1:1in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Click to expand...

I think that connecting Genesis with the big bang is one hell of a leap. No offese, don't buy it. So many holes in Genesis to say that it was anything more than a good begining of a book to try and explain something they knew nothing about.
 
Lindsey-Loo

Lindsey-Loo

Steel Magnolia
Does it really matter HOW God created the Earth? To me, all that matters is that he did create it. I don't personally believe that this was through the big bang, but whatever, it does not matter to me...I believe he created the Earth in six days. The end.

And the link you posted is to the most confusing website I have ever seen in my life...wow *holds head* ouch, headache. Why can't we just take the Bible for what it is, and not try to speculate and add our own thoughts and words. It's there, read it, learn it, love it, and act on it...why try to delve so deeply into something when there is no need for it?
 
Mike182

Mike182

Flaming Queer
wanderer085 said:
The moon is made of green cheese.

The end.
Click to expand...

yes, we can clearly see that as the moon gets older, layers of cheese get crusty and drop off. bit's of moon cheese occasionally fall to earth, for us to smell and taste, indeed it is the best green cheese ever created!

ok, i give up. i can't by any stretch of the imagination make green moon cheese relevant to this debate. would you care to do that? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top