Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
[__ Science __ ] Does anyone else here not believe in the Big Bang Theory?
- Thread starter Authari
- Start date
I think it would depend on how you define what a big bang theory is.
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. Boom!
BeyondET
Member
Well i can say either way as far as what science says, in the beginning in the bible let there be light i am sure was a big event. But the current scientific theory has some issues to hurdle, the Big Bang theory cannot explain these problems.
Initial density perturbation, or flatness problem, horizon problem, monopole problem.
Initial density perturbation, or flatness problem, horizon problem, monopole problem.
Authari
Member
This Article claims that we can see 46 billion light years in all directions, which would mean pretty much we're at the center of the universe, which is astronomically unlikely. Maybe after 14 billion years, light just dies out. Would make sense.
Or maybe we just can't see any further at this time.
BeyondET
Member
Well if the universe has an edge the location is unknown. Where the milky galaxy is in the universe still isn't determined.
Phoneman777
Member
The Big Bang theory rests upon the Space Time Expansion theory.
The Space Time Expansion theory has been mathematically disproven.
Therefore, the Big Bang theory has been disproven.
The data proving this to be so was published on Cornell University's egghead science platform "arXiv" but was taken down by Big Bang gatekeeper moderators of the science cartel. Later, they were published at the 2005 American Physical Society science symposium, so the atheistic science community is aware of the truth, but refuses to accept it, of course, not on the basis of it, but because of its implications.
Barbarian
Member
We appear to be the center of the universe for the same reason any spot on the surface of the Earth appears to be the center of the surface. For a 2-dimensional surface on a 3-dimensional sphere, any point at all could be considered to be the center.
But that doesn't work on the inside of a sphere.
Nope... I don't see that as a real thing.
Barbarian
Member
I suppose 2-dimensional beings wouldn't buy the idea of a surface that was limited but unbounded, either. But that's what the surface of a sphere is. So a 3-dimensional universe can also be limited but unbounded in the same way. I suspect that isn't a difficulty for God, though.
All a 2D entity would see is line segments.
Your model doesn't work as if anything we are inside a sphere not the surface.
Phoneman777
Member
Many rightly object to the unBiblical doctrines of the Roman Catholicism, it's persecutions of "heretics" and horrific murders of 50 - 150 million of God's faithful, most commonly condemned for the "crime" of refusing to acknowledge a ridiculous piece of dead bread could be "transubstantiated" into the literal body of Christ, it's disregard of the Bible and capricious elevation of "tradition" over it.
But, what about it's stubborn insistence on being on the wrong side of science?
During the Dark Ages, people were told that nakedness was sin, resulting in a proliferation of the "unwashed masses" prone to sickness, disease, plagues - though Scripture's instructions on personal and collective hygiene says the exact opposite. The teachings of Galileo and Copernicus were denounced by Roman Catholic leaders. And today, when Dr. Gentry's proof which has stood unrefuted for 50 years and counting that God created the world in six days and rested the seventh, Roman Catholicism still says the first 11 chapters of Genesis are a myth. My sister attended a Catholic secondary school where the principal laughed at the idea of a literal Creation Week.
Amazing how much suffering and confusion could be avoided if people would just believe the plain Word of God.
But, what about it's stubborn insistence on being on the wrong side of science?
During the Dark Ages, people were told that nakedness was sin, resulting in a proliferation of the "unwashed masses" prone to sickness, disease, plagues - though Scripture's instructions on personal and collective hygiene says the exact opposite. The teachings of Galileo and Copernicus were denounced by Roman Catholic leaders. And today, when Dr. Gentry's proof which has stood unrefuted for 50 years and counting that God created the world in six days and rested the seventh, Roman Catholicism still says the first 11 chapters of Genesis are a myth. My sister attended a Catholic secondary school where the principal laughed at the idea of a literal Creation Week.
Amazing how much suffering and confusion could be avoided if people would just believe the plain Word of God.
Barbarian
Member
Actually, a 2D entity would observe objects with length and width, just as we observe objects with length, width, and height, even if the image on our retinas is only 2-dimensional. A 2D entity would be on the surface. It could not perceive anything inside or outside the surface.
So in no way relevant to the question.
To observe length and width would be to see a line segment.
Barbarian
Member
Pretty much the way we observe width, length, and height by seeing two-dimensional images. Just as that 2-D image changes as we walk around an object, so would the line segment change as a 2-D entity moved around a shape. It might be useful to read Edwin Abbott's Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions. Written in the 1800s, it explores the nature of a possible 2-D universe.
Last edited:
Still not relevant to the discussion.