The Universe

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

RPG

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Sep 28, 2017
2,410
1,983
743
Edmond, OK
Scientists try to claim that the universe started with the Big Bang, however; something had to be present prior to the Big Bang to allow it to occur.

What existed before the Big Bang?
Yep. It's axiomatic that something cannot come from nothing. Does this axiom prove the existence of the God described in ancient texts like the bible? Absolutely not. However, I've listened to and read the arguments from people like Hawking, and they just don't make sense.
 
Oct 29, 2016
1,054
451
713
US
Scientists try to claim that the universe started with the Big Bang, however; something had to be present prior to the Big Bang to allow it to occur.

What existed before the Big Bang?
There are only two options. Either option is utterly mind-blowing:

1: The universe, and anything else that may have existed prior to the Big Bang, has always existed

2: Somehow the universe popped into existence from absolutely nothing.

The problem with number two should be obviously self-evident. There would not have been anything to facilitate a universe to come into existence.

Obviously, the first option may be hard to believe. But just because we humans cannot properly comprehend such does not in any way, shape or form suggest that a universe could not exist infinitely into the past (and future).

Obviously, some people believe the universe requires a creator. That in no way solves anything. Because if the universe requires a creator, a creator must therefore require a creator as well.

Also, something most definitely happened some 13-14 billion years ago, and its effect is what they call the Big Bang. But the Big Bang explains what happened after, NOT the "cause", of whatever happened. The leading theory into what actually caused the cause is called "Inflation," created by Alan Guth. In Inflation theory, which has undeniable evidence, the universe has always existed and will continue to inflate for an eternity, including eternally into the past.

In fact, most astrophysicists do not believe the universe had a beginning... I do not understand why a claim is made that most scientists believe the universe had a beginning. Such a thing is hard to believe, I know. But it makes much more sense than a universe coming into existence from absolutely nothing (because there wasn't anything to facilitate the universe coming into existence) and a creator. A creator simply solves nothing. Because a creator would have to have a creator. And so a universe always existing must be true.
 

UrbanCowboy1

Some cowboys gots smarts real good like me.
Aug 8, 2006
4,335
2,086
1,743
Phoenix, AZ
To me. It has to be God's work. Nothing else makes sense.
This the complexity of the universe raises the question...is this just chaotic system or does this suggest a planed orderly system?
Scientists try to claim that the universe started with the Big Bang, however; something had to be present prior to the Big Bang to allow it to occur.

What existed before the Big Bang?
Yep. It's axiomatic that something cannot come from nothing. Does this axiom prove the existence of the God described in ancient texts like the bible? Absolutely not. However, I've listened to and read the arguments from people like Hawking, and they just don't make sense.
There are only two options. Either option is utterly mind-blowing:

1: The universe, and anything else that may have existed prior to the Big Bang, has always existed

2: Somehow the universe popped into existence from absolutely nothing.

The problem with number two should be obviously self-evident. There would not have been anything to facilitate a universe to come into existence.

Obviously, the first option may be hard to believe. But just because we humans cannot properly comprehend such does not in any way, shape or form suggest that a universe could not exist infinitely into the past (and future).

Obviously, some people believe the universe requires a creator. That in no way solves anything. Because if the universe requires a creator, a creator must therefore require a creator as well.

Also, something most definitely happened some 13-14 billion years ago, and its effect is what they call the Big Bang. But the Big Bang explains what happened after, NOT the "cause", of whatever happened. The leading theory into what actually caused the cause is called "Inflation," created by Alan Guth. In Inflation theory, which has undeniable evidence, the universe has always existed and will continue to inflate for an eternity, including eternally into the past.

In fact, most astrophysicists do not believe the universe had a beginning... I do not understand why a claim is made that most scientists believe the universe had a beginning. Such a thing is hard to believe, I know. But it makes much more sense than a universe coming into existence from absolutely nothing (because there wasn't anything to facilitate the universe coming into existence) and a creator. A creator simply solves nothing. Because a creator would have to have a creator. And so a universe always existing must be true.

Seeing a lot of this and it's not accurate. The Big Bang isn't scientific proof that the universe came from nothing. It's only saying that there is a nexus point where time and space were (most likely) infinitely compressed. If you are taking this and saying "see? proof of creation", then you don't understand the science and are falling into the 'God of the gaps' mindset.

5,000 years ago, it was that God that created thunderstorms and fires and plagues. He created the earth itself. As our understanding of the universe has grown through science, we now know better. It was natural processes that created the earth. It was explainable, demonstrable, evidential processes that caused thunderstorms and fires and plagues. God was nowhere to be found. Every discovery we've made has moved Him farther and farther away. As the millennia have passed we've now had to push God outside of space and time itself. But still we are insistent in our proclamations: "Ah-ha! So God must be there!" He always seems to be just over the next horizon.

The Big Bang is simply the limit of what we can explain... for now. These pictures weren't given to you buy God. They were given to you by humans like yourself that dedicated their lives to help you understand more of the universe we inhabit.
 

docjoctoo

Territorial Marshal
Feb 11, 2007
5,009
2,132
1,743
Oklahoma City
Yep. It's axiomatic that something cannot come from nothing. Does this axiom prove the existence of the God described in ancient texts like the bible? Absolutely not. However, I've listened to and read the arguments from people like Hawking, and they just don't make sense.
Interestingly, Hawking as a boy read the Bible. He continued to study this issue his issue entire life. This question continues to attract the best minds to ask very similar questions.
 

Boomer.....

Territorial Marshal
Feb 15, 2007
8,159
6,436
1,743
OKC
I think this theory is mind blowing:

Many-worlds quantum theory gives a new twist on conformal cyclic cosmology, though not one that Penrose agrees with. Our Big Bang might be the rebirth of one single quantum multiverse, containing infinitely many different universes all occurring together. Everything possible happens – then it happens again and again and again.
This goes along with the theory of infinite parallel universes with infinite but different numbers of yourself in each.
 

Jostate

Identifies as a Cowboys fan
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
23,434
15,643
1,743
Which now makes me wonder what capabilities the nexgen telescope will have, and how much deeper into this vast space it will detect. Truly amazing and stuff.
If we reach the potential gravitational lensing offers we could take pics of exoplanets that match what we can see of Mars from Earth now.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
9,563
3,965
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
Seeing a lot of this and it's not accurate. The Big Bang isn't scientific proof that the universe came from nothing. It's only saying that there is a nexus point where time and space were (most likely) infinitely compressed. If you are taking this and saying "see? proof of creation", then you don't understand the science and are falling into the 'God of the gaps' mindset.

5,000 years ago, it was that God that created thunderstorms and fires and plagues. He created the earth itself. As our understanding of the universe has grown through science, we now know better. It was natural processes that created the earth. It was explainable, demonstrable, evidential processes that caused thunderstorms and fires and plagues. God was nowhere to be found. Every discovery we've made has moved Him farther and farther away. As the millennia have passed we've now had to push God outside of space and time itself. But still we are insistent in our proclamations: "Ah-ha! So God must be there!" He always seems to be just over the next horizon.

The Big Bang is simply the limit of what we can explain... for now. These pictures weren't given to you buy God. They were given to you by humans like yourself that dedicated their lives to help you understand more of the universe we inhabit.
Humans that are called earthlings. They’re called that because their composition is roughly the same as the earths top 3% of materials. Mainly water.

These water beings are thought to have evolved from organic building blocks.

Meaning inert, unalive materials formed together and continue to do so only when the earthing remains alive. These elements come together to become self aware.

And eat out at Arby’s.

Now that’s not proof of some other being that judges us when our clothes are off, but it does point to a higher than likely probability of a purposeful creation.

For example, our inability to understand how recently born elements in accelerators and power stations know they’re being observed by us. And can go instantly into entanglement.


Or even crazier, the combination of dna in the correct codes we see today after only 13,000,000,000 years. We are talking about a mutation every other year since the inception of time. Which just isn’t possible. Considering the earth is 4,000,000,000.

I’m not arguing that any of mans religions are correct or uncorrupt. Just saying, not only the pictures are proof of God ( for lack of a better word ), the entire description laid out also seems like proof of God.

Inert matter becoming sentient and shooting dna at each other is miracle after miracle.

It’s harder for me to believe it’s all accidental than that Mother Nature knows what she’s doing.
 
Dec 9, 2013
2,134
753
743
52
So in this infinite parallel universe theory is there any universe where I’m not overweight and bald? Are we the same age (is that implied by parallel)?

More importantly is the bedlam football record the reverse in another universe?
 
Jul 9, 2011
3,093
1,710
1,743
67
Carlos, TX
There are only two options. Either option is utterly mind-blowing:

1: The universe, and anything else that may have existed prior to the Big Bang, has always existed

2: Somehow the universe popped into existence from absolutely nothing.

The problem with number two should be obviously self-evident. There would not have been anything to facilitate a universe to come into existence.

Obviously, the first option may be hard to believe. But just because we humans cannot properly comprehend such does not in any way, shape or form suggest that a universe could not exist infinitely into the past (and future).

Obviously, some people believe the universe requires a creator. That in no way solves anything. Because if the universe requires a creator, a creator must therefore require a creator as well.

Also, something most definitely happened some 13-14 billion years ago, and its effect is what they call the Big Bang. But the Big Bang explains what happened after, NOT the "cause", of whatever happened. The leading theory into what actually caused the cause is called "Inflation," created by Alan Guth. In Inflation theory, which has undeniable evidence, the universe has always existed and will continue to inflate for an eternity, including eternally into the past.

In fact, most astrophysicists do not believe the universe had a beginning... I do not understand why a claim is made that most scientists believe the universe had a beginning. Such a thing is hard to believe, I know. But it makes much more sense than a universe coming into existence from absolutely nothing (because there wasn't anything to facilitate the universe coming into existence) and a creator. A creator simply solves nothing. Because a creator would have to have a creator. And so a universe always existing must be true.
The problem with science and creation of the universe is causality, also known as "cause and effect". For every outcome there is a cause; nothing happens completely spontaneously. And there is ample evidence the universe is not eternal; astronomers tell us the relative movement of solar systems in an expanding universe is the result of some initial beginning, hence the "Big Bang" theory. But again, if the universe is obviously not eternal, what was the preceding cause? Science has no answer.

I think an eternal creator solves everything - a creator outside of the time and space as we know it. Reread the Genesis story in the light of science as we know it. How would a man who lived hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, with a extremely limited vocabulary and only knowledge of what he could see, feel, hear, taste and touch in his immediate surroundings, describe visions of creation if he had seen scenes depicting the steps of creation over millions of years? He had no words for "scene" or most of the incredible things he saw in each of the scenes. "Let there be light", creation of space solar systems and planets, the formation and maturing of the earth, development of life; plants and animals and finally man. He might call each scene a "day". If you read Genesis in context, the visions described are incredibly close to the conclusions of science after thousands of years of study.

I believe that the original cause, the eternal something outside of time and space (because remember, before creating of the universe there was no space) is God. Isn't it interesting that in the Old Testament God choses to call himself "I Am". Not I was, or I will be, but I am; I always am; an indication of eternal being.
 
Last edited:

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
8,732
3,523
1,743
48
DFW
The problem with science and creation of the universe is causality, also known as "cause and effect". For every outcome there is a cause; nothing happens completely spontaneously. And there is ample evidence the universe is not eternal; astronomers tell us the relative movement of solar systems in an expanding universe is the result of some initial beginning, hence the "Big Bang" theory. But again, if the universe is obviously not eternal, what was the preceding cause? Science has no answer.

I think an eternal creator solves everything - a creator outside of the time and space as we know it. Reread Genesis story in the light of science as we know it. How would a man who lived hundreds of years before the birth of Christ, with a extremely limited vocabulary and only knowledge of what he could see, feel and touch in his immediate surroundings, describe visions of creation if he had seen scenes depicting the steps of creation over millions of years? He had no words for "scene" or most of the incredible things he saw in each of the scenes. "Let there be light", creation of space solar systems and planets, the formation and maturing of the earth, development of life; plants and animals and finally man. He might call each scene a "day". If you read Genesis in context, the visions described are incredibly close to the conclusions of science after thousands of years of study.

I believe that the original cause, the eternal something outside of time and space (because remember, before creating of the universe there was no space) is God. Isn't it interesting that in the Old Testament God choses to call himself "I Am". Not I was, or I will be, but I am; I always am; an indication of eternal being.
My small group is finishing a Norman Geisler book which pretty much states this. He’s a bit too heavy-handed, in my opinion, but he does make some great points.
 
Jul 9, 2011
3,093
1,710
1,743
67
Carlos, TX
My small group is finishing a Norman Geisler book which pretty much states this. He’s a bit too heavy-handed, in my opinion, but he does make some great points.
I need to read that book - thanks. Sources for my conclusions are Bishop Scott McCaig and Bishop Robert Barron. Bishop Barron has a unique skill of boiling the complex down to salient points and an encyclopedic knowledge of faith and Catholic Church history - strongly recommend videos (free on youtube) or writings by him even if you aren't Catholic.
 
Last edited:

TheMonkey

Territorial Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Sep 16, 2004
8,732
3,523
1,743
48
DFW
I need to read that book - thanks. Sources for my conclusions are Bishops Scott McCaig and Bishop Robert Barron. Bishop Barron has a unique skill of boiling the complex down to salient points and an encyclopedic knowledge of faith and Catholic Church history - strongly recommend videos and writings by him even if you aren't Catholic.
Geisler debated a lot of atheists, so his style is a bit argumentative for me. The book we read is this one. It’s an apologetics book that spends roughly half of the book arguing intelligent design.

I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0029RJ7D8/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_S0FPJ9Y7J7Z5V31Q4JPJ