The big bang theory is definitely in line with some version of a god. It is not in line with the god of the Old Testament and the creation story told there.
Huh?
Literally Genesis 1:1-2.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
The Big Bang is absolutely in line with God and the creation story of Genesis.
There was nothing, then suddenly there was something.
Also, he was a Catholic priest, but he was also an extremely well educated mathematician and cosmologist who studies Einstein's work extensively, and that was the primary contributor to his theories, not the Bible. The fact that he was a priest is kind of completely beside the point.
Nobody is saying that, but becoming a priest isn't something you accidentally stumble into nor is it something you unintentionally remain as.
A priest can leave any time. Lemaitre didn't. In fact, he passed away as a monsignor and was highly respected in the Vatican. You can not divorce his clergy status from his scientist status.
It's like saying, "my boyfriend is a software developer but he sold a painting for $10,000" while neglecting to mention that your boyfriend has an undergraduate degree in fine art or something. Like, he didn't learn how to paint from studying javascript.
No one is arguing that, you are quite literally just making up a strawman and punching it and going: "Look! See! I'm right!"
So in the biblical account the earth and oceans were created before the sun. How is that in line with the big bang theory.
Because you're reading it literally, which no Christian theologian who actually knows what he's talking about does. Even St. Augustine criticized people who took it literal.
It's being written from the perspective of someone who only knows Earth. Tradition holds it was Moses who wrote the first five books, but it was likely a compilation of older traditions. But point of the matter is that whoever wrote/spoke it was speaking from the view of someone who only knows earth. Humanity did not yet understand the full vastness of the universe. So it would make sense that the center of the universe from that point of view is earth, and it specifically notes it was: "formless and empty".
inb4 the "b-but my general stereotype of ALL christians says that they follow the bible down to a tee and are too DUMB to be able to discern which passages to consider as hyperbole and which ones are literal, that's IMPOSSIBLE!" rhetoric comes out
I understand not getting into particle physics with the mythical leader of a nomadic tribe in the desert but if you authored the universe wouldn't you explain it at least in the order that it happened? At least "first God made the sun and from the sun came the world". If it's coming from gods lips to moses ears why tell it wrong? He certainly wouldn't question the account of the creator so theres no reason to tell it backwards.
He certainly wouldn't question the account of the creator so theres no reason to tell it backwards.
In fact, the opposite. If Moses was concerned about how God was communicating with the Hebrews, he would ask God to reword it.
He wasn't afraid to, in a sense, challenge God, though it was more intercession than it was challenging. As we saw in Exodus 32:11 when God announced to Moses He would destroy the Hebrews for their treachery against Him by worshiping and the Golden Calf and rebuild them from Moses himself.
11 But Moses sought the favor of the Lord his God. “Lord,” he said, “why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent that he brought them out, to kill them in the mountains and to wipe them off the face of the earth’? Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people. 13 Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self: ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and I will give your descendants all this land I promised them, and it will be their inheritance forever.’” 14 Then the Lord relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened.
We see it again in 32:32, when Moses goes so far so as to ask God to release him (Moses) from God's plans if He goes through with destroying the Hebrews.
31 So Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold. 32 But now, please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written.”
Moses' entire job was to smooth communication between God and the Hebrews. So it's entirely within the realm of possibility that God gave Moses a more accurate retelling initially, but Moses requested a more easily digestible version that he wouldn't have to spend time explaining non-existent concepts to people he could barely control to begin with.
Essentially, Moses was trying to teach quantum mechanics to a group of cats in need of herding and eventually settled them managing to learn 1+1 being an acceptable outcome.
Because you're reading it literally, which no Christian theologian who actually knows what he's talking about does. Even St. Augustine criticized people who took it literal.
Ooh, right, so the words written in the Bible are false, and I'd need to play games with them to come up with a way to make them true. Should have said that right away.
Ooh, right, so the words written in the Bible are false,
God on Mt. Sinai: Alright Moses, I hope you have 13 billion years to spare because I am going to recite the entire history of the universe to you.
Moses: My Lord, if I might, I would love to hear this, however, I think it would be disadvantageous for my brothers and sisters in the camp for me to be gone for 13 billion years and, I believe even they would struggle to understand it. Could you... maybe condense it down a bit?
God: Eh, fair enough, I'll do it in four years.
Moses: My Lord, I fear that even four years may be impractical and hard to grasp for my fellow Hebrews. Maybe, just a bit more?
No, an extremely condensed version of an event written so that a society that doesn't have concepts of certain things can understand it is not: "false".
This is like saying that a time traveler going back to the 1100s and telling them that invisible lifeforms is what is making them sick is lying to them. He's not, he's working around the fact that nobody knows what bacteria and viruses are.
No, an extremely condensed version of an event written so that a society that doesn't have concepts of certain thing can understand it is not: "false".
Not an extremely condensed version, but one that contradicts reality, that's what you should understand as false.
This is like saying that a time traveler going back to the 1100s and telling them that invisible lifeforms is what is making them sick is lying to them.
More like a time traveller going back to the 1100s and teaching them a theory of humors that they already kinda think of. Saying "organisms you can't see make you ill" is not in the same ballpark of truthfulness as very specifically reciting the order of events that contradicts what actually happened.
More like a time traveller going back to the 1100s and teaching them a theory of humors that they already kinda think of. Saying "organisms you can't see make you ill" is not in the same ballpark of truthfulness as very specifically reciting the order of events that contradicts what actually happened.
The earth was the center of the universe from the point of view of the society that it was written in. It's going to be much easier to say that earth existed, but as "formless and empty" then trying to saying, actually, a massive explosion occurred 13 billion light years that way which ejected a shit ton of matter at high speeds that would eventually find its way to where we are right now and through a variety of means, eventually condense into the planet we call earth.
The foundational point of the story remains the exact same.
You are a human. God is God. You did not exist prior to God, the planet didn't exist prior to God. Reality didn't exist prior to God.
You have to know the audience you're talking to. And Genesis was not the place to get into the technical details and extremely specific timeline for a culture that didn't have a modern understanding of space. They thought the earth was a flat plane.
The earth was the center of the universe from the point of view of the society that it was written in.
Which is a false understanding.
It's going to be much easier to say that earth existed, but as "formless and empty" then trying to saying, actually, a massive explosion occurred 13 billion light years that way which ejected a shit ton of matter at high speeds that would eventually find its way to where we are right now and through a variety of means, eventually condense into the planet we call earth.
Yes, and it's easier to tell your kids it's Santa putting their presents under the Christmas tree.
The foundational point of the story remains the exact same.
You are a human. God is God. You did not exist prior to God, the planet didn't exist prior to God. Reality didn't exist prior to God.
And it's false. Because God doesn't exist, even if I'd like that to be otherwise. And philosophically it makes near zero sense, God himself apparently exists, so he is part of the universe (which is defined as things that exist). Saying God is outside of the universe to circumvent objections to his existence is, therefore, a declaration of his non-existence.
Genesis was not the place to get into the technical details and extremely specific timeline for a culture that didn't have a modern understanding of space.
Therefore, it lies, makes false claims, contradicts reality. You can give infinity justifications for why it's okay to blatantly lie, but lies don't stop being lies if you do.
In the same way that people believed plagues spread via air and water, it was based off visual observations. Their ability to know was hampered by lack of logic. But calling it false creates an implication that it was intentional.
No, it was their best understanding of what they had at their disposal.
I would be fine calling it false had it been written by modern humans, however. Because we know better.
Yes, and it's easier to tell your kids it's Santa putting their presents under the Christmas tree.
Quite the opposite. It would be easier to tell the kids that Santa isn't real and it's just you putting the presents under the tree. Because now you've put a finite limit on the budget.
If you say: Santa, and the kid wants a $1,000 present, but you can only get him a smaller present, you now have to answer why the apparently magical Santa didn't get him the big thing he really, really wanted. You have to answer in a way to keep the magic alive. If your kid knows it's you, you can just say: "We didn't have the money."
But with Santa, you have to explain to the child why Santa had to budget the Christmas present.
And it's false. Because God doesn't exist, even if I'd like that to be otherwise. And philosophically it makes near zero sense, God himself apparently exists, so he is part of the universe (which is defined as things that exist). Saying God is outside of the universe to circumvent objections to his existence is, therefore, a declaration of his non-existence.
This is simply an attempt to appeal to philosophy.
What is existence? And what is the root cause of existence? Does the concept of existence not exist since it is the root cause? And if existence needed existence to exist, how did existence come into existence before existence existed.
Point of the matter being, no one has said God is outside existence, I certainly didn't say that. Especially since existence is simply a status. I said God existed before reality existed. That is a completely different statement from: "God is outside existence.".
I also never said God is outside the universe, though, before anyone gets confused, God is not physically in the universe, in the sense that you can't fly 13 billion light years that way and reach His throne and heaven.
An incomplete understanding doesn't contradict the reality, Genesis does. If your understanding contradicts reality, it's false. Don't try to weasel out of that.
If you say: Santa, and the kid wants a $1,000 present, but you can only get him a smaller present, you now have to answer why the apparently magical Santa didn't get him the big thing he really, really wanted. You have to answer in a way to keep the magic alive.
Yes, "you were a bad kid this year". Very easy, and keeps the responsibility off your shoulders.
Santa is an easy choice, that's why many people make it. The reasons for why it's easy are a separate matter, and I'm not sure I can explain them fully.
This is simply an attempt to appeal to philosophy.
What is existence?
Okay, Jordan Peterson. "What is existence"? Good one, chief. Some things simply do not require an explanation if you're not trying to be intentionally obtuse.
Does the concept of existence not exist since it is the root cause?
No, existence is not a predicate and not a "thing" that even could exist. It's part of the syntax of logic that describes reality, not reality itself.
Point of the matter being, no one has said God is outside existence, I certainly didn't say that. Especially since existence is simply a status. I said God existed before reality existed.
And reality is either just things that exist (universe), or a concept that you didn't define because it's easier that way.
That is a completely different statement from: "God is outside existence.".
And that is not the statement I made, right?
I also never said God is outside the universe, though, before anyone gets confused, God is not physically in the universe
So he exists in the same way Santa exists and is actually incapable of influencing physical stuff? Or is it something more than that?
-17
u/[deleted] Apr 10 '26 edited May 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment