5 Questions...

It's interesting that your question is specifically aimed at scientists - "What was before the Big Bang?" But phrase it another way - "What was before the creation of the universe?" - and this has been a source of wonder and deep discussion for theologians, too. It troubled and occupied the attention of some of the earliest doctors of the church and has continued to be subject of Christian thought. Not that it troubled their faith - that's not the point I'm making - it roubled them philosophically. They weren't content just to shrug their shoulders and say "supernatural." They wanted to understand God and His purpose - not just to follow blindly.And their conclusion was the same as that given by modern physics. Let me emphasise that - the conclusion of theologians over thousands of years has been the same as that of the modern physicists you are questioning.The difficulty is in the word "before". The "big bang", the "act of creation" - whether we talk naturalistically or in terms of God's act of creation - is the beginning of time. There is no "before" because "before" is a word describing time succession. But the creation of the universe is the point you cannot go beyond. There is not "before" it.To say "BEFORE" the beginning of time is like saying "NORTH of the north pole."Do bear in mind, it is not wise to ASSUME a supernatural agency for that which cannot be explained. The spread and cause of diseases was a mystery beyond understanding for many thousands of years. Man had neither the tools or concepts to attempt a consistent and thorough explanation, though there were some insights and some remarkably accurate, if ill-supported, guesses.How much unmitigated suffering would the world have known if Christian and atheist scientists alike had simply said "We don't know, perhaps we cannot know. It must just be supernatural?"For the Christian, the Big Bang, whether it is a true account or just our first quantum fumbling towards an answer, need not in any way diminish the wonder of God's creative spirit.

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I ask again. What was before the big bang? If lightning created life in the earth's oceans then how did the lightning get there? If life is just a continuous loop and continually regenerates itself then how did the loop get here? You can always go farther back until you reach the beginning, but how can science have a beginning? The only way is through super natural forces.

---

And I say this is an arguement from ignorance "I don`t know so it must have been God".Thats an arguement that has been applied to every gap in scietific knowledge at one time or another, problem is some smart fella always comes along eventually shines a metaphorical flashlight into the hole and says "No God here, I think it works like this Though."

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-11-2001]

​

[This message has been edited by Percipient, 12-11-2001]

"God interacts with the universe in a way which affects it in any way, i.e obliterating cities, turning people into pillars of salt,it IS observable..."I believe God could
"turn people into pillars of salt" but often enough he chooses to accomplish his handy work in other manners, as does his adversary. I believe that all actions taken by an individual are inspired by the direct spiritual hand of good or evil. But by no means is God limited only to use things which would reveal his presence. He either merely chooses not to yet, or we are just to blind to see."Oh and the highest number is whatever anyone else can think of raised to its own power.....plus 1 (pointless as there is always a higher no. as the set of real no.s is a limitless set extended each time by plus 1) "Expecting to understand God is like knowing what the highest number is.

"It's interesting that your question is specifically aimed at scientists - "What was before the Big Bang?" But phrase it another way - "What was before the creation of the universe?" - "My friend, this is exactly my point. The answer is God always existed. God is a being who is infinitely past our understand and logic, so of course his existence is as well. You can claim whatever you want to have started life, but you always have to conceive of what was before that. There has to be something that just existed without anything else before it. And that is God."To say "BEFORE" the beginning of time is like saying "NORTH of the north pole.""The north pole ends, just as the beginning of time ends (or shall I say begins.)

​

[This message has been edited by redstang281, 12-11-2001]

"And I say this is an argument from ignorance "I dont know so it must have been God".That's an argument that has been applied to every gap in scientific knowledge at one time or another, problem is some smart fellow always comes along eventually shines a metaphorical flashlight into the hole and says "No God here, I think it works like this Though."So you presume to tell me that because science can not answer it now, that they will one day?Science can not disprove the existence of God in any context. Maybe thousands of years ago a volcano erupted and killed thousands of people and maybe it was blamed on God killing them. Nowadays scientist say that volcanos' erupt due to some natural force. But that doesn't mean God doesn't use that natural force to make the volcano erupt and to kill those people. All science discovers is the force that God uses to perform with.

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
I believe God could
"turn people into pillars of salt" but often enough he chooses to accomplish his handy work in other manners, as does his adversary. I believe that all actions taken by an individual are inspired by the direct spiritual hand of good or evil. But by no means is God limited only to use things which would reveal his presence. He either merely chooses not to yet, or we are just to blind to see.

​

"Oh and the highest number is whatever anyone else can think of raised to its own power.....plus 1 (pointless as there is always a higher no. as the set of real no.s is a limitless set extended each time by plus 1) "

​

Expecting to understand God is like knowing what the highest number is.

---

And if something has any effect on the universe it (through its effects) is observable. It doesnt matter what the mechanism of the interaction is, it (and therefore whatever is causing the interaction) CAN be observed.Oh and I can think of at least one use for expanding the set of real no.s...Cryptography where High primes (the higher the better the encryption) are used to create cryptographic "keys"...what's the point of your God?

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
The answer is God always existed. God is a being who is infinitely past our understand and logic, so of course his existence is as well. You can claim whatever you want to have started life, but you always have to conceive of what was before that. There has to be something that just existed without anything else before it. And that is God.

---

seems to me I could make the same claim for a pre big bang singularity....apart from the "beyond our understanding and logic" part.....

I don't want to labour the point, but I do think you are revealing the root of two very intersting issues.You still say "you always have to conceive of what was before that" and "There has to be something that just existed without anything else before it."But look, you're still using that word "before." My point was that whether one is Christian or atheist, the term is meaningless when applied to the creation of time. Similarly you use the word "always" - another term which can only have meaning in time.The Scottish Liturgy uses the formulation "He is the Word existing beyond Time, both source and final purpose." This preserves the infinite nature of God which, by use of time-scoped words you were inadvertently mitigating.But there is another interesting philosophical nugget in this. In what sense can "God" have an identity without any contrasting thing that is "not God"?So let me pose an impish paradox: did God create the universe in order to exist?

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
So you presume to tell me that because science can not answer it now, that they will one day?

​

Science can not disprove the existence of God in any context. Maybe thousands of years ago a volcano erupted and killed thousands of people and maybe it was blamed on God killing them. Nowadays scientist say that volcanos' erupt due to some natural force. But that doesn't mean God doesn't use that natural force to make the volcano erupt and to kill those people. All science discovers is the force that God uses to perform with.

---

Not necessarily, what I am saying is that I disapprove of the tactic of using the big fella as an explanation of things for which there is no data...an equally valid view to "there is no evidence so God did it" is "there is no evidence so we know that it was farted out of the arse of a large purple hamster."A yet better view is "there is no evidence so we will wait for some before jumping to conclusions."

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-11-2001]

And if something has any effect on the universe it (through its effects) is observable. It doesn't matter what the mechanism of the interaction is, it (and therefore whatever is causing the interaction) CAN be observed.Even if everything science has observed in the universe can be contributed by a pure scientific factor that doesn't mean God didn't do it. Just because we can't look in space and see an old man with a white rob push a meteor around the earth doesn't mean he didn't push the meteor around the earth. I think it's arrogant for anyone to assume we know and understand everything about the universe with our 5 senses we have been given.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by redstang281:
The answer is God always existed. God is a being who is infinitely past our understand and logic, so of course his existence is as well. You can claim whatever you want to have started life, but you always have to conceive of what was before that. There has to be something that just existed without anything else before it. And that is God.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------seems to me I could make the same claim for a pre big bang singularity....apart from the "beyond our understanding and logic" part.....Ah, my friend but science can not work like that. Science can not abide by the excuse that it just is. That will never be justifiable by any scientific law now, or anyone to ever be invented, created, or discovered. The only law of something just existing is God's law for himself. For if you could believe that science could just exist, than how can you not believe in God?

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:
Even if everything science has observed in the universe can be contributed by a pure scientific factor that doesn't mean God didn't do it. Just because we can't look in space and see an old man with a white rob push a meteor around the earth doesn't mean he didn't push the meteor around the earth. I think it's arrogant for anyone to assume we know and understand everything about the universe with our 5 senses we have been given.

---

You are missing the point:1)If something interacts with the universe it is observable2)If it is observable it can be studied experimentally.Ergo a "big fella" who interacts with the universe in any way is not as you claimed "above science"...

"You still say "you always have to conceive of what was before that" and "There has to be something that just existed without anything else before it."But look, you're still using that word "before." My point was that whether one is Christian or atheist, the term is meaningless when applied to the creation of time. Similarly you use the word "always" - another term which can only have meaning in time.The Scottish Liturgy uses the formulation "He is the Word existing beyond Time, both source and final purpose." This preserves the infinite nature of God which, by use of time-scoped words you were inadvertently mitigating."Of course time can be defined just as the numerical system with no beginning and no end, but how did time get here? Don't limit yourself to 2nd dimensional thought.

quote:

---

Originally posted by redstang281:

Ah, my friend but science can not work like that. Science can not abide by the excuse that it just is. That will never be justifiable by any scientific law now, or anyone to ever be invented, created, or discovered. The only law of something just existing is God's law for himself For if you could believe that science could just exist, than how can you not believe in God?

---

Firstly I never said I believed anything of the sort, given the lack of data I reserve judgement..secondly (and I hope you dont misinterpret this as a personal attack) I suggest that you are confused between science and pre big bang singularity (which I suggested was an equally viable candidate for the "it always existed coz it did" club.)...

​

[This message has been edited by joz, 12-17-2001]

You are missing the point:1)If something interacts with the universe it is observable2)If it is observable it can be studied experimentally.Ergo a "big fellow" who interacts with the universe in any way is not as you claimed "above science"...I understand what you're saying. You are saying that you think God doesn't exist because all of science's observations of the universe indicate scientific explanations. I am offering up two answers to that. 1) Man has not observed everything he thinks he has. 2) What man has observed has been inline with science because God did his manipulation in a scientific way. So therefor is unnoticed by man.