Submitted by: Joel Hendon(3,374) Joel Hendon Log in to become a member of Joel Hendon's Fan Club!
The never ending controversy of how the universe originated seems to be a virtual standoff seeing that neither view can offer empirical proofs. Empirical meaning evidence that you can see, feel, or that you can duplicate. No one living today was a witness to the occurrences so there are no ways to prove it in that manner. But the universe does exist and as technological advances are made, we discover more and more, it’s extreme magnitude. It is accepted by all people that I have known of, that there are but two possibilities for the existence of this incomprehensible universe and it’s intricate functions which permit at least this one planet to exist which will support life. One is the theory taken by naturalists and the other is the one taken by those referred to as creationists. Let us investigate each to see where the most compelling evidence points.
Naturalistic Origin
Let’s begin with a few quotes taken from some of the sources who should know, that we can muster.
“The Big Bang Theory is the dominant scientific theory about the origin of the universe. According to the big bang, the universe was created sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter and in all directions.”
"The big bang theory states that at some time in the distant past there was nothing. A process known as vacuum fluctuation created what astrophysicists call a singularity. From that singularity, which was about the size of a dime, our Universe was born."
UC at Berkeley(http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/IUP/Big_Bang_Primer.html)
"About 15 billion years ago a tremendous explosion started the expansion of the universe. This explosion is known as the Big Bang. At the point of this event all of the matter and energy of space was contained at one point. What existed prior to this event is completely unknown and is a matter of pure speculation. This occurrence was not a conventional explosion but rather an event filling all of space with all of the particles of the embryonic universe rushing away from each other."
U of Michigan(http://www.umich.edu/~gs265/bigbang.htm)
“After the big bang, all matter was scattered into what can be thought of as fine dust, or a cloud or mist. The particles were too small to be detected today. They were what we now call sub-atomic particles. We do not know what these sub-atomic particles consisted of. Scientists are trying to find out. We do know that these particles were much smaller than even the basic building blocks of electrons, protons and neutrons. Those much larger structures came later.”
(http://www.ishipress.com/newstars.htm)
I encourage all to read those articles but it will be found that, in their entirety you will find more of what you have just read. They have spent billions of dollars pursuing this fantasy and they have nothing to confirm anything. Their most touted evidence, that which they claim backs the theory with strong evidence the existence of cosmic background radiation, “the glow left over from the explosion itself”. (NASA)
Talk about wild imaginations, if anyone believes this entire massive universe could be caused from one explosion which one source claims about the size of a dime and another calls it a singular
“primordial atom” PBS(http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dp27bi.html) I have some oceanfront property to sell you in Arizona. They also say that all galaxies are speeding away from us at speeds far greater than the speed of light! How do they know that? Because they measure the distance to where they are now and then divide that by the theory that the Big Bang occurred about 13.7 billion years ago. The theory that the Big Bang occurred 13.7 years ago is calculated by the distance those galaxies are from us. I wonder if maybe those galaxies are not stationary and we are speeding away from them. If not, were we the point of the explosion? Or why are we not speeding along with them? As with all their scientific theories concerning the origin of the universe, all others are gauged to fit the idea. But the real clincher comes from an article from ”All About Science” at (http://www.big-bang-theory.com/)
“According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.”
The last 5 sentences tell it all. Without this knowledge, everything else is null and void. Even if every radical theory they have could be proven true, we would still have to have some supernatural force, or power to create that little “singular” and the heat it supposedly held and then the causation of the explosion. Again, if all the theories were true, it would only mean that man finally figured out some of the things that an almighty God created. There are other scientists who can explain the existence of all of the above “evidence” showing that they had/have nothing to do with a dime exploding.
INTELLIGENT DESIGN
The intelligent design theory has every answer, once one reaches the point of acknowledging that there had to be such a designer for this universe. This, of course goes exactly crosswise to that of the naturalist who can never admit anything greater than nature itself, not admitting that they have no clue how nature got here. Since there are but two possible theories as to the existence of the universe. If one can be disproved, the other of necessity, becomes the true theory. The evidence for intelligent design is overwhelming even though not empirical in the sense of it’s being non-replicatable.
We basically only discussed one reason for disbelieving the naturalist theory of the origin of the universe. That the answer of where the first matter came from is unexplained and it is also proven to be impossible through the laws of physics, which should put a bullet through the brain of the theory but it doesn’t satisfy the naturalists. They contend that some day, some way, that question will be answered. What they don’t recognize is that the question is already answered but not without a supernatural power.
The
Holy Bible contains the only writings or explanation for the beginning of matter, the universe, the world, life and mankind and gives a viable explanation of a supernatural being with the ability to produce everything that we know and all we are yet to learn. Unlimited power and wisdom. Eternal existence, and explanation of why man is here. And the kicker is that it was written by about 40 men from different eras and different nations, contains true scientific information, true prophetic predictions and true geographic information far greater than the writers of that day could possibly have known. And all these writings are harmonious, teaching of the coming and the life of Jesus Christ, God in human form to provide a means for our eternal reward.
Fact one: The fact that things exist have to have one of two possible explanations. They have to have been here forever, from eternity, or they had to have a beginning. If the former is to be accepted, then we have to accept the fact that whatever it was that was here forever, has to be non-physical.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics tells us plainly that energy is always becoming disorganized. Entropy increases as energy is used. And it is constantly being used. Therefore, if matter had existed forever, it would have long since been completely void of energy, all heat would have been dissipated into infinite space. Life would have been non-existent for eons and eons.
If the latter choice is made, then the first law of thermodynamics kills it dead. It plainly states that there is nothing ever totally eradicated nor is anything ever made from nothing. Thus we again are faced with the necessity of a mighty power that is not physical. This very type of being is described for us by Moses approximately 4500 years ago. Does it seem possible that Moses with the lack of knowledge of physics and the spirit of man could conjure up a story of the creation by an all powerful spirit being who could not die, here from everlasting unto everlasting with the uncanny features of filling every need to answer the questions asked today? Most imaginations came up with big strong physical Gods such as Atlas who could hold the earth on his shoulders, etc. But Moses account still defies it’s critics.
The facts boiled down, insist that there has to be an all powerful being with all wisdom who can design and create simply by speaking the word, anything that He so desires. And this being cannot be physical because all physical matter is temporal, cannot last from all eternity nor through out eternity. So what does that require, only a spirit with no physical matter whatsoever…nothing except mentality. If this God is all powerful and all wise, and He is, it simply means that He can do anything, create anything. This is the only criteria available for the existence of physical matter.
Trace any problem that develops for the naturalist to it’s final point that can be explained, and you are left facing an Almighty Spirit, God. The law of Causality is one of the best. It says that “every material effect, must have an adequate antecedent cause”. You may start anywhere and trace from effect to it’s cause, and the cause is also an effect, so on back to it’s cause which is another effect also. This can go on and on and will ultimately bring you to the universe which is also an effect. Now to find it’s cause you find it to be God. He is a cause, but He is not an effect. He is not material, so not a material, therefore is not an effect. He was not created by anyone, so He has no cause. This is the only way the law of causality can be ended.
May this Almighty God bless all who will study His word and investigate His existence.
This author of this Article has choosen to make this article available with free reprint rights. Click here to copy this article.
» left by robert melaccio sr (296 days 1 hour ago.)
Joel, check out my latest in relationship to your email question. It is amazing or maybe not, that I am doing a seminar right now for middle school students called, "the argument for God" which addresses the very same issues. In fact this is one of two I just read that lean toward this topic. It actually is going quite well. The problem with education is they do not present both theories and the real facts concerning them. In fact science and religion do not clash as many learned men over the ages have expressed. Howevr, these learned men and woman have also expressed by nature of their knowledge an understanding that something greater created it all and yes, even those tiny space men if any. Best regards, RTM Respond to this comment
» left by Dave Tanguay (295 days 18 hours ago.)
Joel, I was raised in a religious home and began my education in a parochial school. Nuns would teach us that God can create something from nothing, as you point out here in your article. In my adolescence I began to think on my own, science always interested me you mention a God with no physical form bur all mental. Well I sometimes try to consider God could probably be the sun in the sky. An intelligence with no body but an all powerful mind.
Science will teach us that the sun in our solar system is only an average size star. Suppose Jesus as the son of God reigning over his father’s (the sun) world. Just something to ponder on. I believe science and theology should not distant themselves from one another however work together to find answers. Hey he (God) made us this way not only to accept his word but to do a little research on our own don’t you think?
» left by Joel Hendon(3,374) Joel Hendon (295 days 15 hours ago.)
Hi David; Thanks for reading my article and for the interesting comments. I cannot conceive of God being the sun. First of all it is physical matter and He is a Spirit (John 4:24), also because it is physical, it is temporal and will not last forever. It is estimated that it will burn completely out in 5 billion years. Spirits cannot die because they are incorruptible. Read 1 Corinthians 15:42 and 15:50.
There is no disagreement between science and theism. There is disagreement between theism and stubborn scientists who cannot prove one thing that is in disagreement with the Bible. Some of the world's best scientists are theists and can nail the big-bang evolutionists to the wall. I agree with you whole heartedly that God expects his children to study and research. Far too many simply think that they can believe in God and Jesus and that will take care of them. Wrong! Respond to this comment
Was
this article helpful to you? Leave a Public Comment or Question:
Disclaimer: All information on this site is
provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice
provided to you by any health care or other professional or
organization.
