A Creation Story for Materialists

[5stringJeff]

Scientists do not need to explain what happened before the Big Bang to tell you what happened after. If that were true - the only acceptable scientific theory would be one which explains everything.

I'm not talking about before the Big Bang. I'm talking about the causation of the existence of matter. Why should science not be concerned with that?

 

[Hagbard Celine]

What if we're all part of some giant molecule man! The planets are protons and neutrons and electrons and the stars are nuclei man! And the big bang was caused by two atoms that collided and we're the result! Far out man.

 

[no1tovote4]

What if we're all part of some giant molecule man! The planets are protons and neutrons and electrons and the stars are nuclei man! And the big bang was caused by two atoms that collided and we're the result! Far out man.

Ever read the Dark Tower series by Stephen King?

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Or what if matter can be created through some kind of physical reaction and the first law of thermodynamics is actually incorrect? What if dark matter has properties that allow it to create matter? That would change our whole understanding of the universe!

Or what if the first law of thermodynamics is correct? And the theory of the expanding universe is correct? Wouldn't it be safe to say that if matter can neither be created nor destroyed and that the universe will someday stop expanding and implode on itself, that it already has an infinite number of times? If the universe had already imploded on itself, that would explain where the singularity came from in the big bang. Far out.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Ever read the Black Tower series by Stephen King?

No, I thought of that one time when I was high. I never have gotten into stephen king. I've read a couple of his books, but he doesn't light my fire like say Michael Crichton or Dan Brown or Tom Clancy.

 

[no1tovote4]

No, I thought of that one time when I was high. I never have gotten into stephen king. I've read a couple of his books, but he doesn't light my fire like say Michael Crichton or Dan Brown or Tom Clancy.

That particular story is centered on the idea that each universe is only a molecule in a larger more complex item in another universe, and so on....

That one is different than all of his other stuff.

 

[Bonnie]

Which ones are plausible? What caused nothing to blow up and make something? If it was something that blew up where did that something come from? What observable data and evidence do they use to make one hypothesis more plausible than the other?

That's what Im wondering here???

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Stupid question: When was God created? I mean that as inquisitively as possible.

 

[no1tovote4]

Stupid question: When was God created? I mean that as inquisitively as possible.

Fascinating concept, but the only problem is attempting to put natural law on a supernatural being. Would God need to be created? Could He have actually been created by belief? If that were true were the Norse gods at one time real? Now we are into philosophy and well outside the realm of science.

 

[archangel]

Stupid question: When was God created? I mean that as inquisitively as possible.

God=Infinity...always was and always will be...end of story until death...then we will know the answers! :coffee3:

 

[Bonnie]

Stupid question: When was God created? I mean that as inquisitively as possible.

God doesn't have to be proven by religion it's called faith, but science does especially when it stands firm to say something came form nothing.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Fascinating concept, but the only problem is attempting to put natural law on a supernatural being. Would God need to be created? Could He have actually been created by belief? If that were true were the Norse gods at one time real? Now we are into philosophy and well outside the realm of science.

It just seems that, if we can accept that God might be infinite and not requiring a specified creation, the same could be said about a God-less existence. You are right, however, as we're delving deep into philosophy...

 

[The ClayTaurus]

God doesn't have to be proven by religion it's called faith, but science does especially when it stands firm to say something came form nothing.

But to someone without faith, or a faith different than yours, creationism comes off like "one day God decided to make an existence" and we don't have to proove it because we believe it. That's difficult for some to stomach.

What about God before our existence? What was He up to before creation? Why did He want creation? Was He alone for inifinity before He created us? Or is it the basis of faith to just not ask those kind of questions and just put trust that creationism is what is and to just believe in it?

Again, no condescension intended out of anything I said...

 

[archangel]

Biblical qutotes:
"and God created the Heavens and Earth"
'in Babalon one language was taken away...given many so all could no longer communicate as one'


Now taking this into consideration...maybe the Bible was talking about the Heavens...is it not logical that God separated all planets(capable of intelligent life) so man cannot communicate with each other...as we all know the Earth has several forms of language! another Bible quote...'at the end time all your questions will be answered'!


Proof...evidence... or just speculation? :2guns:

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Biblical qutotes:
"and God created the Heavens and Earth"
'in Babalon one language was taken away...given many so all could no longer communicate as one'


Now taking this into consideration...maybe the Bible was talking about the Heavens...is it not logical that God separated all planets(capable of intelligent life) so man cannot communicate with each other...as we all know the Earth has several forms of language! another Bible quote...'at the end time all your questions will be answered'!


Proof...evidence... or just speculation? :2guns:

Speculation me thinks...The Torah is a compilation of the oral traditions of the 12 tribes of Israel. These people had zero scientific understanding of the world around them and were very primitive. Look at it this way, they were desert nomads. Do you hold any stock in the mythology of present-day desert nomads? I think the story of the temple of Babble was just a way to explain why people speak different languages. The most likely explanation is that the Babylonians used slaves from all over their empire to build the tower. That would have put all different types of people speaking all different types of languages close together in one locale. Bible historians think that at the time the Israelis came up with this story, they weren't even aware of the existence of Europeans or Asians or Native Americans or Indians. Their global outlook would have been very narrow and localized.

No condescension intended.

 

[archangel]

Speculation me thinks...The Torah is a compilation of the oral traditions of the 12 tribes of Israel. These people had zero scientific understanding of the world around them and were very primitive. Look at it this way, they were desert nomads. Do you hold any stock in the mythology of present-day desert nomads? I think the story of the temple of Babble was just a way to explain why people speak different languages. The most likely explanation is that the Babylonians used slaves from all over their empire to build the tower. That would have put all different types of people speaking all different types of languages close together in one locale. Bible historians think that at the time the Israelis came up with this story, they weren't even aware of the existence of Europeans or Asians or Native Americans or Indians. Their global outlook would have been very narrow and localized.

No condescension intended.

there was no need to put a disclaimer at the end..."No condescention intended"...also your answer was a canned one....expressed by many...was looking for something original!

 

[Hagbard Celine]

there was no need to put a disclaimer at the end..."No condescention intended"...also your answer was a canned one....expressed by many...was looking for something original!

Yeah, I have decided to put the disclaimer "no condescension intended" at the end of my posts when I talk to you because I know that I'll get condescension in return. I really didn't mean to be condescending at all. I was just posting an answer to your question. Thanks for calling me unoriginal and "canned" though. That was right nice of you sunshine!

 

[5stringJeff]

It just seems that, if we can accept that God might be infinite and not requiring a specified creation, the same could be said about a God-less existence. You are right, however, as we're delving deep into philosophy...

Frankly, I prefer philosophy! Anyway, the answer to the question is, what the the Ultimate Cause, that thing which causes all other things? Science says... well, it doesn't say anything about it, really, except that there was a Big Bang form whence came all matter. But science is silent on the cause of the Big Bang.

Religion, and specifically monotheism, claims that God is the Ultimate Cause. He Himself has no cause, or creator. He is the first and ultimate cause of all things. I personally believe that this is outside of the realm of science, but frankly, that doesn't bother me one bit. Philosophy and logic can prove things to be true or false outside of the scientific method.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

Science says... well, it doesn't say anything about it, really, except that there was a Big Bang form whence came all matter. But science is silent on the cause of the Big Bang.

Science theorizes that the universe is expanding and will one day stop expanding and then implode. Maybe it's cyclical. Maybe the universe has expanded and imploded before an infinite number of times. That would explain where the big bang singularity originated. It wouldn't explain how the universe got here, but it would provide an explanation for where the matter in the big bang came from. Maybe the tight knot of matter in the big bang is just an immensely massive black hole that was created by the implosion of a previous universe. And upon becoming so imploded and so massive, it exploded and formed what we know today.

 

[5stringJeff]

Science theorizes that the universe is expanding and will one day stop expanding and then implode. Maybe it's cyclical. Maybe the universe has expanded and imploded before an infinite number of times. That would explain where the big bang singularity originated. It wouldn't explain how the universe got here, but it would provide an explanation for where the matter in the big bang came from. Maybe the tight knot of matter in the big bang is just an immensely massive black hole that was created by the implosion of a previous universe. And upon becoming so imploded and so massive, it exploded and formed what we know today.

Even if we were able to determine that there have been a number of cycles of Big Bangs and Big Crunches (which goes against the scientific evidence I have read, BTW), that still does not explain the origin of matter.