Show Me How The Big Bang Theory Is Not A Leap Of Faith

K

Kermos

Registered Senior Member
Faith is proof of things not seen; in other words, that which you say/think but not see is what you believe.

I want to give you an idea of who I am. I was an evolutionist, but Christ changed me into a Christian.

Many scientists believe the beginning of Universe was about 13.8 billion years ago. A subset of those scientists believe an infinitesimally small, densely packed, super-heated region (point) exploded as the Big Bang, and other scientists believe that nothing exploded as the Big Bang.

Regardless of alternative models, such as a cyclically oscillating Universe, I am focusing on the beginning, that is, the origin of the Universe.

I believe the Universe is about 6,000 years old. For me, and not for scientists of the Big Bang persuasion, "faith is assurance of things hoped for, proof of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1) applies because my assurance of things hoped for is my Lord and my God Jesus Christ's triumphant return while scientists are not hoping for the Big Bang since scientists believe the Big Bang is an event of the past.

Scientists believe the Big Bang Theory is science. I postulate that the Big Bang Theory is based on faith. I propose scientists of the Big Bang Theory are more accurately identified as philosophers of the Big Bang Philosophy or Evolution religion, and I write this because of the difference between science and faith. Can any of you scientists rationally explain away this postulate as wrong?

LiveScience.com presents an excellent explanation of the term science at https://www.livescience.com/20896-science-scientific-method.html with an essence of the scientific method including (1) hypothesis, (2) repeatable observation and experimentation, and (3) conclusions. This is pertinent to this thread.
 
Pinball1970 said:
Eh? YOU posted that. The science community accept the theory of Evolution and some of that community are Christian. Most Christians are ok with the theory, this is a fact.
Click to expand...

I identified myself as a former evolutionist but now a Christian as a gesture to other people on this forum. My belief is not the postulate, here, so you are off topic for this "Show Me How The Big Bang Theory Is Not A Leap Of Faith" thread.
 
If you're looking for the origin of the universe, I think you are looking for something that never happened. The universe has always existed in one form or another.
 
Kermos said:
Faith is proof of things not seen; in other words, that which you say/think but not see is what you believe.

I want to give you an idea of who I am. I was an evolutionist, but Christ changed me into a Christian.

Many scientists believe the beginning of Universe was about 13.8 billion years ago. A subset of those scientists believe an infinitesimally small, densely packed, super-heated region (point) exploded as the Big Bang, and other scientists believe that nothing exploded as the Big Bang.

Regardless of alternative models, such as a cyclically oscillating Universe, I am focusing on the beginning, that is, the origin of the Universe.

I believe the Universe is about 6,000 years old. For me, and not for scientists of the Big Bang persuasion, "faith is assurance of things hoped for, proof of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1) applies because my assurance of things hoped for is my Lord and my God Jesus Christ's triumphant return while scientists are not hoping for the Big Bang since scientists believe the Big Bang is an event of the past.

Scientists believe the Big Bang Theory is science. I postulate that the Big Bang Theory is based on faith. I propose scientists of the Big Bang Theory are more accurately identified as philosophers of the Big Bang Philosophy or Evolution religion, and I write this because of the difference between science and faith. Can any of you scientists rationally explain away this postulate as wrong?

LiveScience.com presents an excellent explanation of the term science at https://www.livescience.com/20896-science-scientific-method.html with an essence of the scientific method including (1) hypothesis, (2) repeatable observation and experimentation, and (3) conclusions. This is pertinent to this thread.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a rather naïve religious faith. There is no conflict between the science of Big Bang cosmology and Christianity. In fact the Big Bang was first put forward by a Christian priest, Mgr. Lemaître! It is only those fundamentalists who believe in biblical literalism - a small minority within Christianity - who struggle with accommodating science to their beliefs. By the sound of it you may be one of those.

The Big Bang theory, like all theories in science, is based not on proof but on observational evidence. There is evidence, in the form of the observed cosmological red shift and in the observed Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR). So yes, based on the evidence, scientists have a degree of faith in the Big Bang model for the expansion of the cosmos from a very small early state just under 14bn years ago. Please note by the way that this is not a theory of how the cosmos came to be. We have no evidence of that. It is a theory of how it initially expanded, because that is what the observations indicate.

The faith science has in its theories is not religious faith, though. You need to understand that in science all theories are provisional. They represent the current best model we have. As such, they may be subject to future change in the light of new evidence. So scientists are not committed to a belief system as eternal truth, in the way that many religions demand of their adherents.

Your postulate is therefore misconceived, due to your lack of understanding of the nature of science. That's OK, it's common for people outside science to have only a hazy grasp of what it really is. And in a way you are right that scientists are philosophers, though day to day they may not be aware of it, since what I have been laying out here in simple terms is the underlying philosophy of science.
 
gmilam said:
Isn't it odd that when the big bang theory was first presented, people considered it scientific proof of the creation myth.
Click to expand...
Indeed, I think that was one of the reasons Fred Hoyle disliked it and referred to it, pejoratively, as a "Big Bang", a label which stuck.

Lemaître actually had to intervene with the then pope Pius XII to stop him claiming the theory as evidence of the act of creation, "Fiat lux."
 
Kermos said:
[...] Many scientists believe the beginning of Universe was about 13.8 billion years ago. [...] I believe the Universe is about 6,000 years old. [...] I propose scientists of the Big Bang Theory are more accurately identified as philosophers of the Big Bang Philosophy or Evolution religion [...]
Click to expand...

This, then, seems to be the actual crux of what you are requesting (or at least a first stepping stone): "Show me evidence of something that has existed for well over 6,000 years."
_
 
gmilam said:
If you're looking for the origin of the universe, I think you are looking for something that never happened. The universe has always existed in one form or another.
Click to expand...

That's not science. You are stating your faith.
 
exchemist said:
You seem to have a rather naïve religious faith. There is no conflict between the science of Big Bang cosmology and Christianity. In fact the Big Bang was first put forward by a Christian priest, Mgr. Lemaître! It is only those fundamentalists who believe in biblical literalism - a small minority within Christianity - who struggle with accommodating science to their beliefs. By the sound of it you may be one of those.
Click to expand...

Hello exchemist,

Your Georges Lemaître didn't believe the Word of God, and Lord Jesus Christ is the Word of God (John 1:14), and a Christian's faith is the work of God (John 6:29).

The Ten Commandments are so very important that God wrote them with His Own Finger, and the Word of God is "in six days Yahweh made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day; therefore Yahweh blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy" (Exodus 20:11) as part of the Ten Commandments, yet your Georges Lemaître believed something else.

Your Georges Lemaître didn't understand six days was not six billion years, not six weeks, not about 14 billion years, but six days that the Word of God says God made Heaven and Earth.

Do you think Georges Lemaître was a Christian, based on the evidence?

I saw your posts in the One God, One Message thread, and I saw you hold context for "Before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58).

God "stretches out the heavens like a curtain" (Psalm 104:2), so the miracle of God's creation at the beginning (Genesis 1:1) is not restricted by physical laws.

The Word of God uses the concept of day in an understandable sense, that is, the timeframe recognized as a day by humans when the Ten Commandments were given to Isreal about 2,500 years after the beginning and about 3,500 years ago.

exchemist said:
The Big Bang theory, like all theories in science, is based not on proof but on observational evidence. There is evidence, in the form of the observed cosmological red shift and in the observed Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR). So yes, based on the evidence, scientists have a degree of faith in the Big Bang model for the expansion of the cosmos from a very small early state just under 14bn years ago.
Click to expand...

Let's do the math regarding your data collection.

According to historians, Hans Lippershey applied for a "telescope" patent in 1608, and astronomical observations were initiated by Galileo Galilei using an improved design.

For the sake of this formula, I'll give you the more ancient date of 1608 which is 417 years of documentary evidence for telescopes.

That 417 years represents 0.00000000003% of the time in the Big Bang time-line (((2025-1608)/13800000000000)100), and statisticians typically refer to that as zero.

There you have the amount of time which your observational analysis has been under way.

Big Bang philosophers combined linear time expressed in years is the most recent three hundred billionths since the philosophized Big Bang, and this formula is generous toward the Big Bang philosophers.

exchemist said:
Please note by the way that this is not a theory of how the cosmos came to be. We have no evidence of that. It is a theory of how it initially expanded, because that is what the observations indicate.
Click to expand...

The Big Bang Theory represents the beginning for Big Bang adherents who say the Big Bang started from nothing. Those adherents are people called scientists.

exchemist said:
The faith science has in its theories is not religious faith, though. You need to understand that in science all theories are provisional. They represent the current best model we have. As such, they may be subject to future change in the light of new evidence. So scientists are not committed to a belief system as eternal truth, in the way that many religions demand of their adherents.
Click to expand...

Your sensors detect emissions that originated at a point in time prior to detection, and you do not know whether those emissions originated 1,000 years or 2,000 years or some other time prior to detection; therefore, you Big Bang Theory philosophers speculate without scientific method observation and experimentation.

Big Bang philosophers are not watching the Big Bang. Big Bang philosophers are not reproducing the Big Bang. Big Bang philosophers are violating the scientific method. Big Bang philosophers are faith based.

Big Bang Theory philosophers construct models based on data to satisfy the philosopher's desired output.

exchemist said:
Your postulate is therefore misconceived, due to your lack of understanding of the nature of science. That's OK, it's common for people outside science to have only a hazy grasp of what it really is. And in a way you are right that scientists are philosophers, though day to day they may not be aware of it, since what I have been laying out here in simple terms is the underlying philosophy of science.
Click to expand...

Your final paragraph is illconceived because I didn't request proof of the nature of science nor the Big Bang Theory.

I requested that you explain why you believe the Big Bang Theory is not faith based.

In Christ,
Kermos
 
I believe universe always existed and BB was just a change part of our Visible universe gone thru.
The universe is endless and eternal
All gods are creations of primitive peoples
www.godchecker.com
You and yours got some evolving to do
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top