Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is part 2. Ignore part 1. Part 1 is just a fairly useless introduction to the series that wastes 6 minutes of your life.
He looks at Biblical sections and sees if these sections make sense from the perspective of someone who believes the Bible must be translated loosely before it agrees with modern science.
Part 1 is about the creation of the universe in Genesis. Some of the information it tells is that the Hebrew word describing the water floating around before light formed is the same word used later in the Bible to describe actual water...so it's unlikely that this water is symbolic of space or anything except H2O style water.
Also, although hydrogen had formed shortly after the Big Bang, oxygen required stars to form, so if you believe modern views of the Big Bang theory that means the Genesis depiction of water existing prior to light doesn't work out well.
It therefore seems like some ancient author thought The sky is blue. The ocean is blue. They're probably the same thing and I'll be dead long before anyone can prove otherwise so that'll be somebody else's problem.
The word used for light in the beginning of the Genesis story is the same word used later for the light of the sun. Evidently there was no visible light in our universe until long after the Big Bang had already, err, banged. Therefore, it seems like light didn't insta-poof all at once in a glorious explosion from the big bang as the "let there be light" section makes it seem.
For the first 380,000 years or so, the universe was essentially too hot for light to shine, according to France's National Center of Space Research (Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales,or CNES). The heat of creation smashed atoms together with enough force to break them up into a dense plasma, an opaque soup of protons, neutrons and electrons that scattered light like fog. Our Expanding Universe: Age, History & Other Facts
Our Expanding Universe: Age, History & Other Facts
So according to the theory, all the space, matter, energy and time already existed before the Big Bang since they were they condensed into that primordial atom when they were released and rapidly formed the expanse of the known and observed universe.
Since matter can neither be created nor destroyed then the universe must be eternal according to the theory and the known and observed universe clearly demonstrates that to be false. Poof
So according to the theory, all the space, matter, energy and time already existed before the Big Bang since they were they condensed into that primordial atom when they were released and rapidly formed the expanse of the known and observed universe.
Since matter can neither be created nor destroyed then the universe must be eternal according to the theory and the known and observed universe clearly demonstrates that to be false. Poof
While the Big Bang theory is accepted by the vast majority of physicists, there are still some minor questions concerning it. Most importantly, however, are the questions which the theory cannot even attempt to answer:
What existed before the Big Bang?
What caused the Big Bang?
Is our universe the only one?
The answers to these questions may well exist beyond the realm of physics, but they're fascinating nonetheless. What is the Big Bang Theory?
I'm under the impression that the Big Bang theory does not tell why the expansion occurred, what caused it, or if there are multiple universes that our universe might have stemmed from, in which case our universe could be finite but other universe existed before ours and will continue after ours. I'm no cosmologist, but I believe it just tells something like the universe expanded outward from one point, as well as some of what happened after that.
Therefore, our universe need not be eternal for the Big Bang theory to work.
I do know it isn't thought to be a primordial atom that everything was crushed into though. It is thought to be a singularity, which basically means a place in which the rules that govern our universe behave strangely that nobody understands well. Black holes also contain singularities.
This is part 2. Ignore part 1. Part 1 is just a fairly useless introduction to the series that wastes 6 minutes of your life.
He looks at Biblical sections and sees if these sections make sense from the perspective of someone who believes the Bible must be translated loosely before it agrees with modern science.
Part 1 is about the creation of the universe in Genesis. Some of the information it tells is that the Hebrew word describing the water floating around before light formed is the same word used later in the Bible to describe actual water...so it's unlikely that this water is symbolic of space or anything except H2O style water.
Also, although hydrogen had formed shortly after the Big Bang, oxygen required stars to form, so if you believe modern views of the Big Bang theory that means the Genesis depiction of water existing prior to light doesn't work out well.
It therefore seems like some ancient author thought The sky is blue. The ocean is blue. They're probably the same thing and I'll be dead long before anyone can prove otherwise so that'll be somebody else's problem.
The word used for light in the beginning of the Genesis story is the same word used later for the light of the sun. Evidently there was no visible light in our universe until long after the Big Bang had already, err, banged. Therefore, it seems like light didn't insta-poof all at once in a glorious explosion from the big bang as the "let there be light" section makes it seem.
For the first 380,000 years or so, the universe was essentially too hot for light to shine, according to France's National Center of Space Research (Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales,or CNES). The heat of creation smashed atoms together with enough force to break them up into a dense plasma, an opaque soup of protons, neutrons and electrons that scattered light like fog. Our Expanding Universe: Age, History & Other Facts
That is certainly worth watching if only for Ken Hamm's face -fungus. Aside from those who simply deny the evidence for deep time, there are those who try to make genesis look as though it fits in with science. That means that 'day' has to mean millions of years or billions. It is so common that I had got to roll with it, but the hebrew does suggest a day, 24 hours, morning and evening. In fact that is specifically a Hebrew day related to evening and morning, whereas our western day begins at midnight and goes round to the next midnight. the Hebrew 'day' ends at dusk and begins when it is getting dark (immediately after). The problem of light let alone light and dark, berfore the sun and moon were created, is well known.
That is got around by 'that was how it appeared to man'. But there were no men to see. Only God could have seen what happened, and he knew what really happened, not what it looked like from earth. If an account of myriad stars and uncounted Billions of years, the circling worlds around the sun and the earth being made was how Genesis read, I'd probably be a believer myself, but the account is so much a guesswork of man, that O cannot believe that it is anything else.
The point that Oxygen had to wait until long after the universe was made as it - like biochemicals and heavy elements, requires the death of stars before those elements are abundant. There could be no water -Oxygen combined with hydrogen.
Science has to be right and Genesis wrong, and you really cannot fiddle it it fit in with science.
So according to the theory, all the space, matter, energy and time already existed before the Big Bang since they were they condensed into that primordial atom when they were released and rapidly formed the expanse of the known and observed universe.
Since matter can neither be created nor destroyed then the universe must be eternal according to the theory and the known and observed universe clearly demonstrates that to be false. Poof
Deadwood above asks some good questions. We don't don't know the answers. But the fact is that admitting we don't know the all answers, only some of the evidence, is better and more honest that waving a palpably wrong creation myth about and claiming that is the answer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
