The Big Bang and Evolution

[ArtieE]

Genesis 6 tells us that giants were on the earth in the days before and after the Great Flood, and that these "sons of God" (bene ha ’elohim) sired children with women. The “sons of God” are clearly viewed as angelic or heavenly beings in the Old Testament.

If God was the father of these angelic or heavenly beings who was their mother?

 

[ArtieE]

He simply has always existed from eternity to eternity.

Simply? Can you explain why there would be a god instead of no god simply?

 

[Valjean]

And I believe it is the people who claim that he does not exist that owe us an explanation for why he doesn't.

The burden of proof is not on us, it's on those making unsupported claims.

Given: The universe exists.
Either it came to exist by natural or supernatural 'causes'.

The phenomena we're familiar with all seem to have natural causes. Phenomena previously cited as examples of divine magic or miraculous intervention are routinely revealed to have natural mechanisms. Science is relentlessly driving God farther and farther to the margins. He becomes unnecessary.

Expecting us to believe every conceivable thing, till each is ruled out by evidence is absurd. Demanding atheists disprove God makes as much sense as demanding Christians disprove the Flying Spaghetti Monster or Cthulhu.
The burden of proof is on those making the extraordinary claims, to wit: an undetectable, omnipotent personage meddling with the laws of chemistry and physics.

The reasonable approach is to believe in that for which you have evidence, and withhold acceptance for unsupported claims till supporting evidence is found.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Simply? Can you explain why there would be a god instead of no god simply?

And you gave me the impression that you believed in God, hence you did not need any evidence but, your questions are no different from those of atheists. Can you open the game and be more truthful about your beliefs, so that I could change the direction of my questions? You believe in the Primal Cause or you don't?

 

[jonathan180iq]

There is no viable evidence to suggest that matter existed before the universe.

I'll give you credit for this statement, because it's correct. But you got it right on accident.

It may very well be that matter was spoken into existence when God spoke it into existence.

This is an unsubstantiated claim and it will remain so until one of you Theists finally provides evidence to support your deity. The fact that you believe in something very strongly does not satisfy the requirement of substantiation.

How is it that you have come to the belief that time cannot exist without our universe existing?

First, a simple question...How do you know what time it is?

Now, read all of these and answer that question again.
Einstein's Theory of General Relativity
Minkowski space - Wikipedia
Spacetime - Wikipedia
https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html
NASA Announces Results of Epic Space-Time Experiment | Science Mission Directorate
Did time exist before the creation of matter in the universe?

So, what time is it?

Since the universe is in a constant state of change, that is that the universe is expanding and therefore decreasing in density, it seems absurd to me to suggest that something like the decay rate of carbon-14 ought to remain constant. We may know the decay rate of carbon-14 today, but we have no idea what it was even 100 years ago. Assuming that the decay rate of carbon-14 has remained constant over time is a grave mistake in science.

Until you can produce some evidence that it's not a constant, then how you feel about is kind of a moot point, don't you think? This isn't just true for you. It's true for everyone everywhere.

Carbon-14 - Wikipedia
Radioactive Decay of Carbon-14
Carbon 14 dating 1
How is carbon dating done?

Creationists love to toy around with the idea that somehow, someway, the physical laws of the Universe were different at a chronologically convenient time for their mythological story... I don't understand why, other than the explanation of willful ignorance. Geological, Astronomical, and Radiometric timescales don't mesh will with primitive understandings of Biblical canon, so you guys just make up excuses for how and why those sciences don't work... I think you faith blinds you from realizing just how shallow this version of apologetics has become.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I'll give you credit for this statement, because it's correct. But you got it right on accident. This is an unsubstantiated claim and it will remain so until one of you Theists finally provides evidence to support your deity. The fact that you believe in something very strongly does not satisfy the requirement of substantiation.

The statement was that there was no matter before the Universe. This is simply logical. But of course there was no matter before the Universe! The Universe is composed of matter. If there was matter before the Universe, the Universe was already in existence. In that case, it would be illogical to speak of "before the Universe."

So, Jonathan wants a theist to provide evidence to support the existence of the Primal Cause! You, Jonathan, is that evidence. "How?" Did you cause yourself to exist? "Obviously not!" Who then caused you to exist? "My parents!" And your parents? "Their parents." And their parents? "Their parents." It means that by now, you understand that we are talking about the concept of Causality. One more question: Who caused the first couple of parents to exist? If your answer is "I don't know." Atheistic preconceived notions have taken over your common sense and you have lost track of Logic because, it is only obvious that it was the Primal Cause. If you agree with me, you have got the evidence you asked for the existence of the Primal Cause. If you use the same process with the Universe, that's how it was caused to exist.

 

[metis]

There simply is not one reason why one supposedly must assume there's a "Primal Cause" when "infinity" is another option, and the latter is what most cosmologists drift towards. On top of that, even if there were to be a "Primal Cause", this really doesn't tell us anything about it/them. It's like "OK", so?".

IMO, it's better to say "I don;'t know" than to jump to unwarranted conclusions based on not one shred of objective evidence.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Did you cause yourself to exist? No, your parents did it. And your parents? Their parents. And their parents? By now, you must know I am talking about the concept of Causality that goes as further back as the Primal Cause Who caused the first couple of parents to exist. Can you refute what I am saying? If so, I am all ears!

What if the "Primal Cause" is not some self-aware, powerful entity, but instead is nothing more than the fundamental processes and rules governing the interactions of the material of the universe? Molecular chains - the ones used as the building blocks of life - have been shown to combine and re-combine, and given the raw materials, even DUPLICATE themselves. Think of a magnetic half-zipper, rolling around in a sea of zipper-parts. Those zipper parts adhere to the original half of of the magnetic zipper, and then when all the parts match up and stand in balance alone, the magnetic embrace is broken, and another half-zipper goes rolling off into the sea. No consciousness, no decision-making, no intelligence required. The rules of interaction of base universal materials does it all.

And why is it so important that those rules "had a beginning?" That the material "had a beginning?" That's you... unable to break out of the mindset/idea that you, yourself "had a beginning." You're willing to accept that "God" had no beginning... why not the material and rules of the universe? What logical basis could you possibly have to deny it when you grant God the same property?

 

[viole]

If God exists perhaps the big bang was his way of creating the universe making scientist and Religion correct.

Maybe he is also responsible for evolution.

Maybe.

I am sure that devising a system that destroys the weak and is based on arm races between beings wanting to eat, and beings wanting not to be eaten, is very divine and beautiful. A designer that designs things so that they either beat his own design or die. Like a chess player playing against Himself. How intelligent and clever. He cannot possibly lose.

Indeed, a very efficient system that involves mass extinctions, killing asteroids and vulcanoes, and makes very efficient use of the energy of the sun (that has no nervous system feeling pain) by dissipating most of it.

I could not have thought of something so benevolent and parsimonious myself.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Ben Avraham]

What if the "Primal Cause" is not some self-aware, powerful entity, but instead is nothing more than the fundamental processes and rules governing the interactions of the material of the universe? Molecular chains - the ones used as the building blocks of life - have been shown to combine and re-combine, and given the raw materials, even DUPLICATE themselves. Think of a magnetic half-zipper, rolling around in a sea of zipper-parts. Those zipper parts adhere to the original half of of the magnetic zipper, and then when all the parts match up and stand in balance alone, the magnetic embrace is broken, and another half-zipper goes rolling off into the sea. No consciousness, no decision-making, no intelligence required. The rules of interaction of base universal materials does it all.

And why is it so important that those rules "had a beginning?" That the material "had a beginning?" That's you... unable to break out of the mindset/idea that you, yourself "had a beginning." You're willing to accept that "God" had no beginning... why not the material and rules of the universe? What logical basis could you possibly have to deny it when you grant God the same property?

You are being too hypothetical in this post of yours above. Hypothesis goes along with speculation. That's not how I discuss about the Primal Cause. You will succeed better if you put your question to a Christian, who, at least has faith to claim. I don't have to hypothesize or speculate. I know. When one knows, he does not have to guess which is the main atheistic method. i grant HaShem with nothing. Rather He grants me with every thing I need. If you don't believe what I am saying, prove the opposite. Who or what caused the Universe to exist if the Primal Cause is not Real?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You are being too hypothetical in this post of yours above. Hypothesis goes along with speculation. That's not how I discuss about the Primal Cause. You will succeed better if you put your question to a Christian, who, at least has faith to claim. I don't have to hypothesize or speculate. I know. When one knows, he does not have to guess which is the main atheistic method. i grant HaShem with nothing. Rather He grants me with every thing I need. If you don't believe what I am saying, prove the opposite. Who or what caused the Universe to exist if the Primal Cause is not Real?

I don't have to hypothesize or speculate. You don't know. I know you don't know. When one knows that someone else doesn't know, he does not have to guess at what the other might know - which is the main doofy-istic method. I grant Flying Spaghetti Monster with nothing. Rather He grants me with all the pasta I will ever need. If you don't believe what I am saying, prove the opposite. Who or what caused the idea of pasta to come into being if the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not real?

In other words... give me a freaking break.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I don't have to hypothesize or speculate. You don't know. I know you don't know. When one knows that someone else doesn't know, he does not have to guess at what the other might know - which is the main doofy-istic method. I grant Flying Spaghetti Monster with nothing. Rather He grants me with all the pasta I will ever need. If you don't believe what I am saying, prove the opposite. Who or what caused the idea of pasta to come into being if the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not real? In other words... give me a freaking break.

If you cannot refute me, you can never say that what I claim to know is not true. One who does it is only playing the fool.

 

[ArtieE]

And you gave me the impression that you believed in God

No, I don't believe god exists but I don't believe he doesn't exist either. I'm open to any reasonable explanation for why he would exist in the first place.

hence you did not need any evidence but, your questions are no different from those of atheists. Can you open the game and be more truthful about your beliefs, so that I could change the direction of my questions? You believe in the Primal Cause or you don't?

I don't have any beliefs regarding your Primal Cause. I am just interested in why and how such a Cause would exist in the first place.

 

[JustWondering]

You made the first statement. Prove yours and I will prove mine.

My first post to you in this thread was to ask you for evidence of your god. You seem like an intelligent person, obviously you wouldn't believe in something just because someone told you to. So you must have evidence, I just want to know what it is.

 

[Ben Avraham]

No, I don't believe god exists but I don't believe he doesn't exist either. I'm open to any reasonable explanation for why he would exist in the first place.I don't have any beliefs regarding your Primal Cause. I am just interested in why and how such a Cause would exist in the first place.

One of the reasons why the Primal Cause exists in the first place is that, if He did not exist, you would not exist; I would not exist; the whole of the Universe would not exist. If you don't believe, tell me how the Universe started to exist. You should know to be so vehement that there is no reason for His existence.

 

[ArtieE]

One of the reasons why the Primal Cause exists in the first place is that, if He did not exist, you would not exist; I would not exist; the whole of the Universe would not exist.

Those aren't reasons why your Primal Cause would exist in the first place, those are your reasons for why you think He does exist! Why and how did he exist "before" He created the universe? Why and how was there a Primal Cause instead of no Primal Cause "before" He created the universe? Suppose He hadn't bothered to create anything at all only He and He alone existed. Why and how would He exist? Suppose He was completely alone and only He existed. What if He asked Himself: "Why and how do I exist? Why am I here? What is my reason for existing? How come I exist?" What would be the answers?

 

[Ben Avraham]

Those aren't reasons why your Primal Cause would exist in the first place, those are your reasons for why you think He does exist! Why and how did he exist "before" He created the universe? Why and how was there a Primal Cause instead of no Primal Cause "before" He created the universe? Suppose He hadn't bothered to create anything at all only He and He alone existed. Why and how would He exist? Suppose He was completely alone and only He existed. What if He asked Himself: "Why and how do I exist? Why am I here? What is my reason for existing? How come I exist?" What would be the answers?

The Primal Cause has always existed. That's what existed before the Universe and you guys do not understand what was there before the BB. Your question is tantamount to establish an age for the the Primal Cause. Scientists have established an age for the Universe. About 14 billion years. The age of the Universe is an evidence that the Universe had a beginning. It is only obvious that it was caused to begin by the Primal Cause. If you find hard to accept that from me, tell me yourself how was the Universe caused to begin. Focus that I said "how" and not what or who. Hope for your reply to this.

 

[Ben Avraham]

No, I don't believe god exists but I don't believe he doesn't exist either. I'm open to any reasonable explanation for why he would exist in the first place.I don't have any beliefs regarding your Primal Cause. I am just interested in why and how such a Cause would exist in the first place.

Your life is a dilemma! You don't believe the Primal Cause exists, neither that He does not exist. What do you believe
then, in theories? You are doomed to waste your life believing and not believing in the same thing. Who wants to dialogue with someone who believes and disbelieves the same thing at the same time? That's a paradox!

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

If you cannot refute me, you can never say that what I claim to know is not true. One who does it is only playing the fool.

And the same goes for you against any claims I might make, whether I believe them or not. Doesn't make me any less wrong in some instances. At least I understand this.

 

[Ben Avraham]

And the same goes for you against any claims I might make, whether I believe them or not. Doesn't make me any less wrong in some instances. At least I understand this.

Oh yes, I do understand. My religion is a religion of life, not of death. My problem with you is to prove to you the Logic of the concept of Causality as an evidence for the existence of the Primal Cause. Now, this that you are wrong or myself for that matter, is irrelevant.