Prove the big bang...

Great Debates
81

Your common sense understanding of how time operates doesn’t map well onto the extreme conditions that existed at the beginning of the universe.

In a relativistic universe “before” and “after” are not absolutes. They’re determined by the reference frame of the observer. I might experience Event A happening before Event B, while you might experience the opposite.

At large velocities and high levels of spatial curvature, time becomes “space-like” and space becomes “time-like” – movement through one translates into movement through the other. It’s possible that at the moment of the Big Bang the curvature of space was so extreme that time curved back on itself. There’s no “before” the Big Bang just like there’s no “north” of the North Pole.

82

Most do not reject truth when they see it—they reject the hypocrisy of another! My true comfort is that God has given to save the world from me—by showing me the light and the way—God so loves the world.

I am a follower of Christ Jesus. I believe the majority of Christians are being led astray by the way of the world. I am absolutely sure that we are to give, en masse, our lives (talents, gold, labor, etc.) for the benefit of mankind. That means, we are to lay down our nets and be fishers of men. That means, forget about our “theologies” of separation and give the world the concept of a kingdom—a place where we can live together forever. Moreover, show by our actions how to get there. And that is, all of us, repenting of what we are doing, telling the world we are wrong, and truly helping those who need help toward that goal. And that means, at any cost to us, turning our weapons into plowshears and feeding, clothing, and loving the world of folks who will believe once we begin to engage in this practice. And that means we are to serve any nation, kindred, tongue, ethnic group, including the poor and those who do not believe a kingdom will come into their presence in their lifetime—as we were served by God through his Son before we believed in eternal life.

At first it would be difficult to get others to join in, however, I do not believe, any nation, ethnic group, religion, political group, scientific bent, medical group or any person would refrain from that endeavor, once they see a great nation such as this United States living out our words without having an agenda for profit.

I can see that once we are in that place, we will have conquered death. Even if we did not conquer death individually, every person serving and teaching their children to serve each other inter-culturally, would bring dominion and life forever on this planet for all of mankind. I do understand an absolute though—if we seek that place, the end of time will come because collectively and individually there will be no death. We will be granted eternal life.

I love eating and breathing and living this truth that I know. I am nobody and one of the worst of one-time unbelievers, however, from the time that I learned this truth (over 30 years ago), I have been teaching and practicing as best I can the way to the kingdom of God. I can see the kingdom! For those who do not believe, I go to them and sit down with them and serve their needs. Rich or poor, begger or thief I will teach that in God there is no male nor female, Jew nor Gentile, bond nor free—we are all one. It is there and in that place where we all can live and where there is no death.

Blessings

83

“I don’t know why the Christians, Jews and Muslims can’t get along-they’re all just worshiping Christ in their own way!”-little old lady on Larry King radio program many years ago.

84

That’s just fantastic, lightwait, so what’s this got to do with the big bang again?

85

I don’t believe you. Christ Jesus has never ignored me. But you did.

86

If and apostle can speak of himself, I feel free to do the same…
I will explain my own OP: We are unable, as shown above, to prove the “big bang”. If we want to prove the theory, we must first come together.

However, because of their individual and often derogatory “kill the enemy” mentality, some find ithe content and demeanor of the OP illusive. I will tell you this: There is a time for reproof and correction etc., however, in an appologetic circumstance, such as when Christ Jesus went out and into the world, there should be for the most part, love, healing and the experience, to be seen by others, of coming together—that is the true appologetic.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

What am I—A follower of Christ Jesus and by His words and the teachings of the Holy Spirit, I am “furnished unto all good works”.

I am not—I am not Pentecostal, I am not a Baptist, I am not a Lutheran, I am not a Catholic, I am not a Mormon, I am not in a Cult, I am not in any denomination

I read the Bible 30 years ago and met Christ Jesus. I, as Paul did on the road to Damascus, saw the light and knew that light to be the Lord Christ Jesus. I was given to help others change from darkness to light. This is not my doing—Christ Jesus made the increase. The darkness of and the unknowing of what was before the big bang can be alleviated when we accept the light of the kosmos and its forever/eternal existence. Moreover, in a “physical” sense, the only begotten of the Father. By, through and in the light of the kosmos, was all created—truly, the beginning is the light.

I have preached in more than 150 Churches of many denominations and never, that I know of, offended their doctrine. I did not offend their doctrine because I preached directly from the Words of God and not their denominational preferences.

I have encouraged most denominations to preach and teach in the mission I directed—I loved all of the Biblical teachings. Moreover, I encouraged the men and women in the mission to go to the Church of their choice. I required each preacher and/or teacher to teach and preach directly from the Words of God and no other teaching. Primarily, because the folks in my mission congregation were novice. Moreover, myself and our board of directors understood the perfecting of the saints first required a well rounded understaning of the Biblical precepts. Also, many of our residents had family members in various denominational settings in our community—we encouraged our residents to reconcile with their families.

What does that make me? It makes me a minister that is striving according to His working:

Col 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:
29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

I truly do not want to sound like I think I am good or bad—I just cannot see the need, on these boards, for separation. I know unbelievers, Mormons and Catholics, and Fundies, and Liberals, etc., who are and have been saved by Christ Jesus. Why do we separate ourselves instead of uniting as one to present to those who do not yet believe how Christ loved even Peter who denied him three times? Throughout the years in ministry, I have watched many non-believers, those from various cults, churches and different denominational settings meet Christ Jesus in our mission—I have witnessed thousands come to the Lord and many who would enter the ministry.

Why do we speak against each other instead of supporting one another? Were I to have spoken against any, in the mission or without, our ministry would have become/been as oppressive as the world is and ultimately to none effect. I personally was called the director, however, it was the Bible, and to those who were saved the Holy Spirit, that lead us in our personal and collective lives. We continually trained each other to look at each other through the words and teachings of Christ Jesus and once saved by His Grace, through the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

I really would like to know: What is the problem? I have asked the Lord, what can I do to help the alleviate the obvious difficulties that are here in this most wonderful but oppressive venue. (Oppressive: unjustly inflicting hardship and constraint, esp. on a minority or other subordinate group.)

Paul to Timothy, concerning the Church:
4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.**

Blessings: It seems to start, I can only, by that which I have learned, ask God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit to bless you all with the following words:

In (inside and within—not “at” the beginning historically) the beginning (who is the light of the kosmos) God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form and void (it was not there). And God said, “Let there be light…” When that concept is believed and placed into our minds and our hearts collectively, we will be able then to prove the big bang or however our physicality came into existence. Light is the answer. From the light, we can prove all things. The light is the beginning and the ending. When we acknowledge the light, whichever way we look, we are in the light.

87

Shown where again?

I would love to come together, but I have been advised by a moderator to stop referring to My gigantic Boner.

88

What does being there really matter anyway? On Thurdsay afternoon at about 3PM local time, a Kingfisher darted under Withypool bridge, Exmoor and flew away upstream along the River Exe. I saw it - I was there. Can I prove it? Can I bollocks.

89

Nobody currently living was “there” in Galilee during Joshua bar-Joseph’s earthly ministry, so how can it be proven?

90

One more time. Theories are postulates, or assumptions. It is assumed that the Big Bang occured. Based on that assumption various predictions are made. Then people perform experiments to test the predictions. If the experimental result agrees with the prediction made then the original assumption is accepted as being true to the extent that it has been shown to result in accurate predictions.

Sheesh. I though everyone knew that.

91

You want the Big bang proven, but you just use words written by humans and you accept that these humans thousands of years ago that believed the world was flat. They had no telescopes or satellites and believed the moon had it’s own light, they didn’t know it was our suns reflection on it. So, there is more proof of the big bang than the Bibles account.
Monavis

92

You sound like a nice guy lightwait. Good luck trying to bring people together. It sounds like a noble cause.
What does any of this have to do with the big bang?
Perhaps you could explain your intention for posing your question.
If you didn’t want the answer, you shouldn’t have posted the question.
If we wanted to go to Church, we’d all be somewhere else.
The fact that some of us are interested in science does not make us any less as people. We are all trying to change the world for the better (I hope).

93

What leads you to this opinion?

Are people “brought together” by starting out challenging people to prove something not amenable to proof?

94

Just posting to comment on the statement made several times that, according to the big bang theory, the universe began at that moment. Not so, or at least not quite, in a very important way. What the theory says is that the event was a singularity beyond which we cannot “see.” Thus, we don’t and can’t know what (if anything) came before. That’s not at all the same thing as saying nothing went before. IOW, the statement should be that the big bang was the beginning of the universe as we know it. What came before might have been nothing or, well, almost anything.

95

BTW, lightwait, Liberal is a Christian. One of several respected champions of the faith on the SDMB. (Me? I’m an athesit, or strong agnostic depending on how one defines terms.) In blowing him off, you do no credit to your witness.

96

i’m just trying to reach out. This is just an opinion based on what I’ve read. It seems to me that lightwait is pretty passionate about spreading a positive message its just that this message has got absolutely nothing to do with his original post.

If you read the rest of my post (which wasn’t very long), I suggested that lightwait is spreading his/her message in the wrong place and is probably doing more harm than good.

97

I did read your whole post. I don’t agree that there is a wong place to spread such a message, but a combative start isn’t the way to begin that message in any place.

It is a waste of time to try to prove by logic that an assumption is true. As I said, scientific theories are assumptions and can be shown to be either wrong or incomplete at any time.

The most outstanding example is the theory of gravitation. For a little over 200 years Newton’s gravitational equation was the explanation for that phenomenon. Then along cameEinstein’s explanation which explains the same effect in a different way that covers the same ground as Newton plus being more applicable in some circumstances.

For example, Einstein’s theory accounts for the bending of light by massive objects and Newton’s does not. Einstein’s explains the red shift of light coming from a massive object and Newton’s does not. Einstein’s theory predicts the magnitude of the preccession of Mercury’s orbit correctly and Newton’s does not. Newton’s theory is still valid within its limitations and is widely used at low velocities and relatively weak gravitational fields.

Nevertheless, it doesn’t matter how many examples are given to show that the Big Bang theory correctly predicts what actually happens in experiments. As with the case of gravitation there might be another explanation that applies everywhere Big Bang does and extends to regions BB can’t account for.

It is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of scientific theories to demand “proof” and then when it isn’t satisfactorily forthcoming to say, “See?”

98

Thank you,

Then why does He/she use the “F” word?

Blessings

99

My point was and is, after being treated poorly in another thread, that no person can prove the big bang. However, were we to come together in that pursuit, instead of displaying our argumentative natures, we might be able to achieve that goal. Moreover, I learned, from the Bible, that the proceedure to any end is to labor toward that end instead of thwarting the ability to accomplish that end by fighting the progress. If one cannot join in because of disbelief, let it alone until the end comes or everything comes to naught. Whether the end can be proven or not, every person involved can learn.

I knew that no person could, in the end run, prove the big bang. As it happened, only one tried—I am not going to debate the issue in a venue that is built on proving each other wrong—that gets us nowhere.

The big bang is the paradigm of the world. Correct or incorrect, the big bang cannot be proven. I know that—I can do the math.

A better way, in my understanding, is for all involved to come together first and then prove the problem.

Blessings

100

You are right. We cannot prove the Big Bang. I’m not convinced that you understand why even talking about proving the Big Bang is meaningless.

I’ve been in really good research institutions and mediocre ones. The better the quality the institution, the more the people in it try to “prove” each other wrong. Solid theories aren’t called bulletproof for no reason. If you can defend an idea against the best that some really smart people can throw against it, then you’ve got a really solid one. The best places do it just the way we’re supposed to do it in GD - attack the ideas, not the person.

If a bunch of people get together with a primary goal of being supportive of others’ ideas, you get weak ideas at best, pseudo-science at worst.

If you don’t want to defend your ideas against the very strongest criticism, you’re probably in the wrong place. I’m sure there are fora where the response to whatever you say is “amen, brother.”