Posts Tagged ‘Big Bang’
A Christian liar called Barrett Vanlandingham complains that people in his bible classes do not always believe in God or the Creation. It is more fashionable to be an atheist and to believe in evolution. The Christian indoctrinator has the brass face to blame it on to the indoctrination of “America’s school children with the Big Bang Theory and Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution in textbooks for many years now”.
The very word indoctrination refers to the centuries old Christian practice of getting the kids before they have developed any critical abilities and feeding them what Christians have to believe whether it is right or wrong. The normal education of a child in the discoveries we have made over recent years, the years since the various Christian churches were removed from direct influence upon our kids, is now, according to Christian liars, indoctrination. Instead of proper education supervised by teachers qualified in their subjects, Vanlandingham wants Christian kids to be taught by creationists like one Brad Harrub, PhD(!) who has written a creationist text called Convicted.
On Amazon, the book has invited two reviews, a favorable one by a woman who sounds like a Sunday School teacher, as she says she has bought a lot of these books for a class, but her husband, who she says is more scientifically minded, is not impressed by it. So, she says, “This book seems to be much more suited to those of us whom are less science-minded”.
The other review is critical. The writer however is delighted to have it on his bookshelf for its utter comedic worthlessness. This critic thought it sounded like a spoof, but Dr Harrub has a PhD, and seems to mean what he says. The reviewer wonders how it is possible for anyone to simultaneously be so wrong while remaining utterly unaware of the degree of their wrongness. The answer seems to be that they are convinced it is proper to be dunces and liars for God, especially when they can earn $50,000 a year for lecturing to Christians on this nonsense! The blurb says that Harrub is “not only convinced, he is convicted…” and so he should be. For perverting young minds.
Vanlandingham, apparently using the book as his source, says: “No one has ever proven that non-living matter can evolve from nothing. And certainly no one has proven that life can evolve from non-living matter.” He concludes that “something (or someone) had to have always been there for anything to be created”. Accepting this for the sake of argument, we would then want to know, Is God considered as alive? If so, then the living God must Himself have been created, because “something (or someone) had to have always been there for anything to be created”. Christians make an exception for God. He did not have to be created because He is eternal. That, we have to accept without proof. Why is inventing a superbeing without proof permissible but assuming matter is made spontaneously at the Big Bang is not permissible. It is more parsimonious in not requiring the invention of an unnecessary entity, God.
Next, we learn the Bible has proven itself many times over as reliable in the areas of history and geography. That is false, but Vanlandingham has a source. It is William Ramsay a man who was born in 1851 before Darwin published the Origin of Species. Ramsey found the geography of the book of Acts, was right. Why should anyone imagine an educated Roman did not know the places they were writing about? All were on regular trade routes. The gospel of Mark on the other hand is not at all good geographically about the land of Palestine, where the events described supposedly happened
Vanlandingham comes up with the old canard that “the Bible has never been proven wrong on anything”. This is too ignorant for words. He is not telling the truth at all. He is telling blatant lies, and depending on the ignorance and gullibility of his readers to accept them. Everything he says pertinent to the argument is false, or not in the least supernaturally true. Christians always want proof but will never give it. The bible is wrong on a lot of things, but we depend upon evidence, proof being all together less easy to supply for ancient books of poor provenance. But the bible is plainly self contradictory in many places, and contradictory assertions cannot be both correct. Only the contortions of fundamentalist exegesis can save it, for those who will believe anything. Much in the bible is wrong, many supposed prophesies are wrong, even Jesus’s own. I have a detailed website showing it, and exposing Christian liars like this man.
Jesus was a man of profound morals but hardly a Christian today follows what he taught even though he is meant to be God incarnate. The bible cannot be wrong, but God, when he is Jesus, can be wrong, and modern US Christians prefer S Paul to Christ. They believe what Paul taught in contradiction to Christ—the ancient mysteries of the dying and rising god, whom Paul made Christ into, even to the extent of frequently calling it all a mystery!
Vanlandingham ends up with Genesis. “Evolutionists insist creation took place billions of years ago. They push this view so there will be enough time to theorize that mankind evolved three-million years ago from non-living matter, then from amoeba, worms, reptiles, lower mammals and so on.” He says “there’s no way the Earth could be much older than 6000 years old—certainly not millions or billions of years”. He even comes up with this purler: “how could plants grow if they had to stay in the dark for millions of years waiting on the sun to be created?” This Christian teacher follows the biblical scheme of creation divided into days—imagining the plants and trees to have been made on day 3 before the sun was illuminated on day 4—but with each day stretched out to millions of years.
These days are so obviously the days on which certain acts of creation were celebrated in the New Year celebrations of old, that there is no need to think they were ever meant to be days of actual creation. The ancient people celebrated creation, but had no proper idea of the order in which things were made, and Genesis 2 contradicts this order in Genesis 1. He proves to our satisfaction that he is a dunce, even in Christian terms.
He concludes by saying humans were made in God’s image, but something must have gone astray even here, for half the human race differ in appearance from the other half—they are women. He then cites Hebrews as saying man was created “a little lower than the angels”. Well, the bible also tells us that angels and human women had intercourse, so Christ must have been mistaken when he thought angels were sexless animals, even though he was God and had had the Old Testament to read since he was a boy God! But “mankind is to rule over all the creatures”, and “amoebas, worms, reptiles and apes weren’t fit to rule over anything”. Well in the end, the worm indeed conquers, and worms, amoebas and so on will still be inhabiting the earth after humans beings have gone extinct. That is a safe prophecy.
He ends in American fashion with, “God bless you and have a great day!”, but God would truly bless us, and our days would be better, if He removed this dross from the world. However, God is caught on His own petard, because he says that sin will always be with us, so the best we can do is shut these criminals in a penitentiary, where they cannot harm our kids.
In A Brief History of Time, British scientist Stephen Hawking had suggested that the idea of God or a divine being was not necessarily incompatible with a scientific understanding of the Universe. In extracts from a new book The Grand Design, Hawking now says God is not necessary for creation. He has no place in theories on the creation of the universe. The Big Bang was a consequence of the law of gravity.
Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.
What of the fortuitous place we actually have to live in, the planet earth in the solar system? Didn’t God have a hand in that? In 1992, a planet was discovered orbiting a star outside our own solar system. It makes our own solar system no longer unique, and not as fortuitous as it seemed. If we live on one, and can see others, there could be millions of them.
That makes the coincidences of our planetary conditions—the single Sun, the lucky combination of Earth-Sun distance and solar mass—far less remarkable, and far less compelling as evidence that the Earth was carefully designed just to please us human beings.
Hawking has achieved worldwide fame for his research, writing and television documentaries despite suffering since the age of 21 motor neurone disease that has left him disabled and dependent on a voice synthesiser.
Some Comments Made On Facebook
Virginia Keyes replied to this but on Facebook. Here is the converstion so far.
Virginia Keyes could,nt possibly agree with this. One best seller stephen leave it at that!!
Mike Magee It’s no argument just to say you couldn’t agree with something. If God is not necessary for Creation, then the universe can begin without Him. Then again, as I have written elsewhere, time having a beginning might be an illusion rather like… the railway tracks coming to a point at the horizon. Once we get to times less than the Planck time, it changes, receding towards an absolute zero time ever more slowly so that it never gets there. (Look at: http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/570BigBang.php)
It means time never began, the universe is eternal, and that must suit a Christian, mustn’t it? Even if Mrs Keyes couldn’t care less 🙂 .
Virginia Keyes Stephen hawkins believes that gravity started everything. i ask therefore where did gravity come from. We do need a moral compass and hawkins way is rather free for all. Maybe his secular views could be partly responsible for the decline around us. I do care Mike only not as yet found the correct path for myself!
Virginia Keyes Hawkins, for a scientist very unscientific. i.e. without experiment, with out proof!
Mike Magee I haven’t read this new book, but do not think Hawking is saying that gravity is God. He will not be saying gravity started everything, so he is not being illogical as you seem to imply. But as I said about a week ago, it is my preference to discuss things I have blogged about on the actual blog, where the original item can be read, and the debate followed from the outset, if a debate ensues. If anyone gets to the post by Google or whatever, they will have no idea that you are criticizing it here on Facebook.
Sorting the terms gives this simple equation:
( tv )2 – ( to )2 = ( tc )2
Using the difference of two squares, it reduces to the same form as the original hypothesised equation. When we trace back our observed time to zero at the Big Bang, universal time has the value tc, the time that corresponds with T in our original surmise, the time we took to be Planck’s time, a fundamental unit of time. For universal time to reach zero, our observed time has to become imaginary. It suggests that there never was a Big Bang. On the miniscule scale, time is eternal. Perhaps that will actually please Christians.