Vatican says its ok....

[patkatt1]

Vatican now says it's ok to believe in God and the big bang theory!

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html

 

[Thesauron]

Vatican now says it's ok to believe in God and the big bang theory!
https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html
 

Good for them. They've never been really interested in anything scientific, but now that they've strayed so far from the truth in the bible, why not take in just about anything?


Johan

[carlos]

2 hours ago, patkatt1 said:

Vatican now says it's ok to believe in God and the big bang theory!

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html

Hmmm. That's exactly the same we believe. The Big Bang model is currently the one that best explains the way the universe is and it agrees perfectly with the Genesis account of creation. Obviously, it was Jehovah who started the Big Bang process.

 

For example:

*** g 10/15 p. 8 Evolution ***
Does the Bible’s creation account rule out the possibility that the universe began with the big bang?
The Bible simply says: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) It does not comment on exactly how God created everything. So even if a cosmic explosion produced our universe, that would not contradict what is stated in the Bible. Rather, Genesis 1:1 would answer the question, Who caused the big bang?
Of course, many scientists believe that the big bang was a spontaneous, undirected event that led to the self-arranging of particles of matter into stars and planets over a period of time. The Bible does not support that view but states that the formation of the universe was a direct act of God, whether he employed some sort of cosmic explosion or some other method of creation.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”—Genesis 1:1.

 

 

 

 

 

[EccentricM]

Haha, forget that... 

 

[Shawnster]

There is nothing in the Bible that contradicts the Big Bang Theory.

 

*** rs p. 62 par. 2 Bible ***
Origin of the Universe: Gen. 1:1: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” In 1978, astronomer Robert Jastrow wrote: “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same: the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy.”—God and the Astronomers (New York, 1978), p. 14.
 

[Old]

2 hours ago, Thesauron said:

Good for them. They've never been really interested in anything scientific, but now that they've strayed so far from the truth in the bible, why not take in just about anything?


Johan

What planet do you live on? 

[carlos]

1 hour ago, EccentricM said:

Haha, forget that... 

I meant the article quoted above:

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html

I don't find anything objectionable in that article. It sounds reasonable and it's the same I believe.

 

Now if the Pope has also said he supports evolution, that's a different thing.

[Old]

4 minutes ago, carlos said:

I meant the article quoted above:

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html

I don't find anything objectionable in that article. It sounds reasonable and it's the same I believe.

 

Now if the Pope has also said he supports evolution, that's a different thing.

Hey, it is okay by me if the pope descended from a monkey. That might explain a lot!  

[Bob]

2 hours ago, carlos said:

Hmmm. That's exactly the same we believe. The Big Bang model is currently the one that best explains the way the universe is and it agrees perfectly with the Genesis account of creation. Obviously, it was Jehovah who started the Big Bang process.

 

For example:

*** g 10/15 p. 8 Evolution ***
Does the Bible’s creation account rule out the possibility that the universe began with the big bang?
The Bible simply says: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) It does not comment on exactly how God created everything. So even if a cosmic explosion produced our universe, that would not contradict what is stated in the Bible. Rather, Genesis 1:1 would answer the question, Who caused the big bang?
Of course, many scientists believe that the big bang was a spontaneous, undirected event that led to the self-arranging of particles of matter into stars and planets over a period of time. The Bible does not support that view but states that the formation of the universe was a direct act of God, whether he employed some sort of cosmic explosion or some other method of creation.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”—Genesis 1:1.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, but their reason for doing so has more to do with catering to the lapsed Catholic and apathetic masses. The only reason why I wouldn't personally  support the BB theory is for the reason the article mentioned; its designed to explain how the universe began WITHOUT the need of a Creator. So trying to put God behind the BB seems like an attempt to keep God in the classroom (this is the reason why religion tries to put God into godless theories like evolution or the so called "theistic evolution" nonsense).

 

Perhaps if science didn't try to claim the universe came as a result of nearly impossible odds and sheer coincidence, I'd be more on board with it. This is just my personal view.

[EccentricM]

23 minutes ago, carlos said:

I meant the article quoted above:

https://m.phys.org/news/2017-05-vatican-celebrates-big-dispel-faith-science.html

I don't find anything objectionable in that article. It sounds reasonable and it's the same I believe.

 

Now if the Pope has also said he supports evolution, that's a different thing.

My post was a reply to the OP  I was pointing to him supporting evolution as opposed to being shocked that he supported the big bang. 

Edited May 8, 2017 by EccentricM

[Vinnie]

Didn't the Catholic church once force people to believe the world was flat and the earth is the center of the universe?

[Shawnster]

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Vinnie said:

Didn't the Catholic church once force people to believe the world was flat and the earth is the center of the universe?

 

I don't know about the flat Earth part but the center of the universe?  Oh yes they most certainly did.

[Bob]

1 minute ago, Shawnster said:

 

 

 

 

I don't know about the flat Earth part but the center of the universe?  Oh yes they most certainly did.

I personally think that the push, especially since the 50s, to support any scientific theory is so to apologize for the centuries of espousing and promoting scientific ignorance (though Ptolemy's theory was universally accepted for 1500 years).

[Old]

35 minutes ago, Bob said:

Yes, but their reason for doing so has more to do with catering to the lapsed Catholic and apathetic masses. The only reason why I wouldn't personally  support the BB theory is for the reason the article mentioned; its designed to explain how the universe began WITHOUT the need of a Creator. So trying to put God behind the BB seems like an attempt to keep God in the classroom (this is the reason why religion tries to put God into godless theories like evolution or the so called "theistic evolution" nonsense).

 

Perhaps if science didn't try to claim the universe came as a result of nearly impossible odds and sheer coincidence, I'd be more on board with it. This is just my personal view.

So God does not have the ability to create in an instant?

I visualize the big bang not as a random act but an infinetly well coordinated assembly of a material universe from an unmaterial source. Beautiful in every detail, demonstrating infinite wisdom in design, a totally organized event. Something we will be able to study forever and not be totally satisfied with our then current understanding. After forever we may have the knowledge and ability to pass through a black hole and have another forever to study that side of the universe.

I love it! 

Any body want to come along?  

 

[Bob]

1 minute ago, Old said:

So God does not have the ability to create in an instant?

I visualize the big bang not as a random act but an infinetly well coordinated assembly of a material universe from an unmaterial source. Beautiful in every detail, demonstrating infinite wisdom in design, a totally organized event. Something we will be able to study forever and not be totally satisfied with our then current understanding. After forever we may have the knowledge and ability to pass through a black hole and have another forever to study that side of the universe.

I love it! 

Any body want to come along?  

 

Oh yeah brother! I am on board with that. In fact, I think the reason why Jehovah created the universe and the planets is so that we can having something to do forever.

 

Just these days science is trying so hard to push a materialist view of life and the universe. I don't want to inadvertedly support that view, is what I mean.

[carlos]

Many brothers don't understand this but from the viewpoint of the Big Bang theory, it's irrelevant who or what started the process. The Big Bang is perfectly compatible with a Creator, and it's compatible with the universe appearing from a singularity, or from nothing or whatever, because it only deals with the events after the Big Bang.

 

We can calculate quite precisely how the universe expanded, how quickly matter was formed or how matter and anti matter destroyed each other. There are a lot of parameters we can calculate, and there are evidences that confirm those calculations. But there is no way we can calculate anything before the instant of the Big Bang. The Big Bang model implies that our universe had a beginning, but it says nothing of what existed before or what started it.

 

Of course, I say the First Cause is irrelevant for the theory, not that it is irrelevant for us.

[Bob]

58 minutes ago, carlos said:

Many brothers don't understand this but from the viewpoint of the Big Bang theory, it's irrelevant who or what started the process. The Big Bang is perfectly compatible with a Creator, and it's compatible with the universe appearing from a singularity, or from nothing or whatever, because it only deals with the events after the Big Bang.

 

We can calculate quite precisely how the universe expanded, how quickly matter was formed or how matter and anti matter destroyed each other. There are a lot of parameters we can calculate, and there are evidences that confirm those calculations. But there is no way we can calculate anything before the instant of the Big Bang. The Big Bang model implies that our universe had a beginning, but it says nothing of what existed before or what started it.

 

Of course, I say the First Cause is irrelevant for the theory, not that it is irrelevant for us.

I agree, primarily because the Bible simply doesn't comment on how the Universe came into existence. It just says God created it.

[egapevets]

We can theorize on this forever and never truly understand the 'length and breadth' of the moment the material universe came into exisrence.  

 

[Greg Dent]

The Vatican has for quite a while had a whole department dedicated to astronomy and astrophysics and or other scientific studies.. They actually have some of the leading research collaborations happening with other institutions around the world or at least did up until a few years ago. Not sure now.  But to say they are not interested in science is plain wrong sorry.

[Old]

1 hour ago, Greg Dent said:

The Vatican has for quite a while had a whole department dedicated to astronomy and astrophysics and or other scientific studies.. They actually have some of the leading research collaborations happening with other institutions around the world or at least did up until a few years ago. Not sure now.  But to say they are not interested in science is plain wrong sorry.

Gotta give the Devil his due.  Where we are looking at scholarship rather than religion we can find a great deal of knowledge in their scholastic publications  We have quoted from the Catholic Encyclopedia many times in our publications. Doesn't make there mother organization any better, but no reason to put down scholastic achievement.

[Thesauron]

The Vatican has for quite a while had a whole department dedicated to astronomy and astrophysics and or other scientific studies.. They actually have some of the leading research collaborations happening with other institutions around the world or at least did up until a few years ago. Not sure now.  But to say they are not interested in science is plain wrong sorry.

They have been interested as long as it has confirmed their world view. When it didn't, you risked being executed as a heretic. This does not mean that the contribution of many religious scientists have been important, such as Mendel's studies on genetics.


Johan

[Thesauron]

Many brothers don't understand this but from the viewpoint of the Big Bang theory, it's irrelevant who or what started the process. The Big Bang is perfectly compatible with a Creator, and it's compatible with the universe appearing from a singularity, or from nothing or whatever, because it only deals with the events after the Big Bang.
 
We can calculate quite precisely how the universe expanded, how quickly matter was formed or how matter and anti matter destroyed each other. There are a lot of parameters we can calculate, and there are evidences that confirm those calculations. But there is no way we can calculate anything before the instant of the Big Bang. The Big Bang model implies that our universe had a beginning, but it says nothing of what existed before or what started it.
 
Of course, I say the First Cause is irrelevant for the theory, not that it is irrelevant for us.

This is true, but the implications of a Big Bang theory is that it came out of a singularity (for lack of a better word) and that it then expanded into a chaos where the world was born. There was no chaos, there was total control, I believe. This us where these churches go wrong. They forget God. But this is to be expected, right? Some would also claim that God used evolution to create life.


Johan

[yettosee]

4 hours ago, carlos said:

Many brothers don't understand this but from the viewpoint of the Big Bang theory, it's irrelevant who or what started the process. The Big Bang is perfectly compatible with a Creator, and it's compatible with the universe appearing from a singularity, or from nothing or whatever, because it only deals with the events after the Big Bang.

 

We can calculate quite precisely how the universe expanded, how quickly matter was formed or how matter and anti matter destroyed each other. There are a lot of parameters we can calculate, and there are evidences that confirm those calculations. But there is no way we can calculate anything before the instant of the Big Bang. The Big Bang model implies that our universe had a beginning, but it says nothing of what existed before or what started it.

 

Of course, I say the First Cause is irrelevant for the theory, not that it is irrelevant for us.

So true. The big bang model itself cannot explain what caused it. Because time started at Big Bang, and it makes no sense  to ask what existed before Big Bang. So still no one is really quite satisfied.

 

Genesis 1:1 is not just a belief, but a complete understanding. Vatican never understood this.

 

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." 

 

God created the concept of time along with the physical universe.

 

That's why He is known as alpha and omega, or in other words he is not bounded by time. Beautiful.

 

I am very grateful to our organization for teaching us the Bible.

Edited May 9, 2017 by yettosee

[Old]

7 minutes ago, Thesauron said:

This is true, but the implications of a Big Bang theory is that it came out of a singularity (for lack of a better word) and that it then expanded into a chaos where the world was born. There was no chaos, there was total control, I believe. This us where these churches go wrong. They forget God. But this is to be expected, right? Some would also claim that God used evolution to create life.


Johan

Chaos is in the eye of the beholder. Take my office as an example, to my Wife it is chaos. From my point of view everything is where I intended it to be.

Man can plot where the planest and stars will be many years ahead, so there is no reason to conclude that all these universes , stars, planets, are not exactly where Jehovah intended them to be from the instant of creation.

[ChrisC]

On 09/05/2017 at 5:30 PM, Old said:

Chaos is in the eye of the beholder. Take my office as an example, to my Wife it is chaos. From my point of view everything is where I intended it to be.

Man can plot where the planest and stars will be many years ahead, so there is no reason to conclude that all these universes , stars, planets, are not exactly where Jehovah intended them to be from the instant of creation.

Do you normally capitalise the word "wife"?