Do you believe in a god that is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InHouston

What I think I mean by 'Big Banger' is that I'm referring to those who subscribed to the Big Bang Theory. The Big Bang Theory is another form of Creationism. It removes God from the picture, which is fine for me, but leaves in the ‘fantastic’. Yes, it seems that galaxies are moving away from each other in all directions, but that doesn’t prove that it was the result of some initial cosmic explosion from a primeval atom. I find it peculiar too that the Big Bang was first proposed by Georges Lemaître, who just so happened to be a Belgian priest; one who would have the proclivity to subscribe to creationism.

Think about it.

---

Well, I see a couple problems with this. First, a priest can be a scientist and you shouldn’t assume that if a priest says something they are speaking about god necessarily. He didn’t say the theory of how god made the universe expand, and he's not the only contributor anyway. Also I think you are confusing classic big bang theory with the theory of inflation. The big bang theory doesn’t actually describe a creation of anything in the way you seem to be using the word (I addressed this on page 2) so it is not a form of creationism. And finally if you disagree with the method of extrapolating the current conditions in the universe backward in time to determine what happened then how do you propose cosmologists should go about it?

In actual fact many theologians were thrilled that the Big Bang theory triumphed over Bondi & Hoyle's competing steady state theory because at least the Big Bang had a finite past. However, unfortunately for those theologians, the Big Band IS NOT another creation story, since the theory explicitly says there is no first moment. It's just an account of the cosmic expansion. The primeval atom theory by the way never got off the ground. I do agree that the theory contends the early universe had fantastic energy density. But then the observed universe is pretty fantastic as well (what with a super black hole at the center of our own galaxy, and quasar jets twice as long as a galaxy is wide streaming out from the centers of other distant galaxies, planets ensconced in biomass etc. etc.) Fantastic doesn't always mean not believable and certainly doesn't always mean not true.

Quote:

---

Yes, it seems that galaxies are moving away from each other in all directions, but that doesn’t prove that it was the result of some initial cosmic explosion from a primeval atom.

---

No it doesn’t. Especially since it isn’t what the Big Bang contends. But it is evidence that universe was expanding for as long ago as we can see (for when the Hubble telescope peers into deep space it’s looking backwards in time). But expansion is also consistent with the steady-state universe. There's other evidence to consider: the background radiation predicted by the Big Bang theory and not the Steady State theory, the atomic abundances predicted by the Big Bang theory and not the Steady State theory, the inherent instability of all the general relativistic models that exhibit steady state behavior, etc.

But all this brings us back to science and I had the distinct feeling ezed and insert_namehere wanted to take this conversation in a different direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by guyone

I don't think God appreciates this line of conversation.

---

I disagree. I think God would find this discussion very refreshing. It's his creatures using their brains for something useful.