How is the big bang theory more probable than creationism?
-
God came from where?
This is what I understand of Creationism. A god, or gods, who were just floating around in nothing. cause there was nothing until there was something. And there was not something until it was created. Thus implying a Creator, or god. So previous to there being something there was a whole lot of nothing and some higher power, god, whatever existing in nothing. Until this Creator made the earth, and the sun, and the stars, and the people.
The Problems:
1)If the creator existed than how could there be nothing?
2)What do you think the weather is like when you live in nothing? Oh...wait...there can't be weather because you live in nothing.
3) Did the creator pull this nothing from their coat pocket? And if there was a coat pocket to be pulled from, would that not again imply that something existed in this nothing?
4)Where did the creator get souls from? Are they a part of nothing, too? Cause it seems that really souls are part of something. Maybe they are part of the creator, but then the creator must be something living in nothing? How is it possible for something so powerful as to create the universe to be nothing?
A simple equation of creationism, as stated by me is:
"God + Boredom + Nothing = the Universe as we know it (weather, living animals, and of course mankind)."
50%
Voted for by Orange seedsandpeel, maddyblue.
-
Nothing blew up?
This is what I understand the Big Bang to be:
One day, all of the nothingness in the universe pulled together and exploded. Then that created everything we have today.
The Problems:
1) How can nothing gather together?
2) What caused the explosion; there's no match, no chemicals to start a chemical explosion, and no way for a nuclear explosion to occur
3) If all the matter in the universe exploded and shot out, it would not clump together and create a planet or star. If you send something off into outer space, where there is no friction, the matter would continue to fly through space for all time. Even if it didn't, there would be no pressure to compact all the matter into the planets.
4) Even if all that happened, how did life arise?
The Evolution Handbook states a simple equation of the Big Bang:
"Dirt + water + time = living creatures."
Voted for by Tito the Ninja.
-
God Created Evolution!
Is it so Hard to imagine GOD saying "Let there be Light" with a "Big Bang" that covered the Entire Universe with All Matter, providing Everything needed for Life to form and flourish? Evolution means change, and that change takes a LONG LONG time. This concept is a hard thing for a "Fast Food" world to swallow. No, a Crocodile cannot mate with a Duck and Create a "CrocoDuck". That's Not how Evolution works! However, for example, a certain group of Ducks developed larger mouths(bills) to catch and hold more Fish. This in turn was passed on to their ducklings as a better means of survival for Future Generations. We still have Ducks today in addition to also having Pelicans. See how it works? There will probably never be a "magic bullet" or "missing link" that will prove Evolution exists. The changes are much to subtle and not easily reproduced. Yet, I hope more people will come to the conclusion that All living things are unique Creatures created by GOD and share a common ancestry!
Voted for by earthcreature.
None of the choices fit your opinion? Add one →
|
Adding your reply:
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
Tito the Ninja
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
He wasn't nothing
God is a supernatural being that exists outside of time and space. Because he exists there it may have only been 3 seconds or 3 bajillion years before he started creating. He has the ability to create anything from nothing.What's your equation for the creation of the universe without God? It's like trying to explain the creation and evolution of the computers without saying man.
maddyblue
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
I actually believe both theories are possible, and can co exist. Either way it seems to me that there was some force outside of the infinite nothingness we are assuming existed before us. Whether you call it god...or....whatever, to me there had to be something.
I mean, I do actually agree with you on the whole 'how can something come from nothing' without some outside force. But to me that doesn't discredit the big bang theory.
maddyblue
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
My Real Point
Was to show you that your own argument against evolution/big bang has as many holes as an argument against creationism. Especially if one is warping the facts somewhat to fit their argument.Why is it any more likely that some infinitely powerful being exist in a big nothing than it is that energy existed in a big nothing? Both follow the rule of not being able to be created or destroyed, right. So...both had to exist before anything else. I think it's just as easy to believe that a ball of energy existed as it is a god existed.
Kazrith
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
Tito the Ninja
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
I understand where you are going, but when has somebody seen energy create something. I know you can say that no one has seen God create something, but there's a few differences. God is credited in the bible for creating the world. When has energy been credited for creating anything? (This is not a retorical question. If there is an answer, I would like to know).
What evidence is there disproving creation.
PS. I don't mean to sound one-sided, I'm just young and I don't have as much experience in this field as you (I haven't studied more than a few months)
maddyblue
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
Second, I think this argument would be more constructive if you did a little bit of reading about energy, and the Big Bang theory itself. Wikipedia does what I think is a fairly unbiased job of explaining the Big Bang Theory. It even talks about how some religions have accepted or rejected the Big Bang Theory and why. I would not offer Wikipedia as an decisive argument, but a good place to begin to learn a little more about what you are aguing against.
maddyblue
May 14, 2007
Edit | Reply
Personally, I think that is the answer to the question of teaching creationism or teaching Evolution. As long as you teach them both as being theoretical and not fact.
The nature of your god makes his existence unprovable and makes his non existence just as unprovable. That's why it is religion, it requires a leap of faith. In your case your leap of faith is that the Bible after all it's translations and rewrites is absolutely true. In the case of science the leap is smaller. You have to make a leap across an evolutionary gap in the timeline of man, or you have to make a leap across the depths of space to things that we cannot observe with our naked eye. So, no there is no way to disprove creationism. Until some explanation of the beginnings of the universe is proven, I will choose to theorize and philosophize about it. And I find no problem getting both my religious and scientific beliefs to conincide with each other.
Kazrith
May 15, 2007
Edit | Reply
i wish to add
and there is no way to prove creationismMakessenseright
May 24, 2007
Edit | Reply
June 4, 2007
Edit | Reply
According to their Kind?
The Bible does tell Us GOD Created all animals according to their Kind, but the Bible does NOT specifically say how GOD did that! Moses tried to explain Creation the best he knew how at that Time. He did not know anything about DNA.He wasn't around when the first animals were made, so he didn't exactly see how it was done.
We Now have Many Fossile Records that show a progression of change through Time. Humans also share 98% of the same DNA as chimps. We don't share 98% of our DNA with an Oak Tree or a Dog. You Can't easily dismiss Evolution just because it does not fit exactly with what Moses Said!
Please register or login to comment! It's totally free