There is no God he's dead. The Big Bang killed him, right?

Answer 1

If the big bang killed him, would we know?

Answer 2

No, most scientist now believe that the big bang never happened. There are some laws conflicting with the theory. So-if God is dead-something else killed him-but not big bang. Look for another suspect.

Answer 3

Ironically, for decades, the "Big Bang" was used by many Christians in support of God -- since it suggested a specific moment of creation, and since no one could specify the cause of the Big Bang.

[So Christians just said, "God did it -- it's how he created the universe."]

In regards to another post here, as far as I know, while there are some issues with the Big Bang and some aspects that have not been explained adequately, it's still a predominate view of the universe's creation -- I don't think it's been popularly discredited as of this time. (Wikipedia gives a pretty good overview.)

Answer 4

lol, i love you sara!
Theories come and theories go. Numerous scientists now agree that the "big bang" did not, and could not, occur. Scientists have illustrated why the theory is unworkable in many professional books and journals; yet, because of media hype, news coverage, and "nature programs" often aired on TV, the public is largely unaware that scientists disagree sharply upon their diverse speculations. For every theory advanced by man, someone else has advanced facts to prove that theory wrong. Let us look briefly at what some of the scientists themselves say about the big bang theory.
"The French Mathematician, Lecompte de Nouy, examined the laws of probability that a single molecule of high dissymmetry could be formed by the action of chance. De Nouy found that, on an average, the time needed to form one such molecule of our terrestrial globe would be about 10 to the 253 power billions of years. "But," continued de Nouy, ironically, "let us admit that no matter how small the chance it could happen, one molecule could be created by such astronomical odds of chance. However, one molecule is of no use. Hundreds of millions of identical ones are necessary. Thus we either admit the miracle or doubt the absolute truth of science" (Quoted in "Is Science Moving Toward Belief in God?" by Paul A. Fisher, The Wanderer, Nov. 7, 1985; cited in Kingdoms In Conflict, C. Colson, p. 66).
"Probably the strongest argument against a 'big bang' is that when we come to the universe in total and the large number of complex condensed objects in it [stars, planets, etc.], the theory is able to explain so little" (G. Burbidge, Was There Really A Big Bang in Nature?, 233:3640).
"This persistent weakness has haunted the big bang theory ever since the 1930's. It can probably be understood most easily by thinking of what happens when a bomb explodes. After detonation, fragments are thrown into the air, moving with essentially uniform motion. As is well known in physics, uniform motion is inert, capable in itself of doing nothing. It is only when the fragments of a bomb strike a target-a building for example-that anything happens... But in a big bang there are not targets at all, because the whole universe takes part in the explosion. There is nothing for the expanded material to hit against, and after sufficient expansion, the whole affair should go dead" (Fred Hoyle, "The Big Bang in Astronomy," in New Scientist, 92, 1981, pp. 521, 523).
"The Big Bang is pure presumption. There are no physical principles from which it can be deduced that all of the matter in the universe would ever gather together in one location or an explosion would occur if the theoretical aggregation did take place.Theorists have great difficulty in constructing any self-consistent account of the conditions existing at the time of the hypothetical Big Bang. Attempts at mathematical treatment usually lead to concentration of the entire mass of the universe at a point. The central thesis of Big Bang cosmology,' says Joseph Silk, 'is that about 20 billion years ago, any two points in the observable universe were arbitrarily close together. The density of matter at this moment was infinite.'This concept of infinite density is not scientific. It is an idea from the realm of the supernatural, as most scientists realize when they meet infinities in other physical contexts. 'If we get infinity [when we calculate], how can we ever say that this agrees with nature?' This point alone is enough to invalidate the Big Bang theory in all its various forms" (Dewey B. Larson, The Universe of Motion, 1984, p. 415).
"The naive view implies that the universe suddenly came into existence and found a complete system of physical laws waiting to be obeyed" (W.H. McCrea, "Cosmology after Half a Century," Science, Vol. 160, June 1968, p. 1297).

Answer 5

God is not dead - he is alive forever and ever. You really shouldn't joke about things like this - you know the big bang didn't kill him.

Answer 6

You sound like Nietsche's tightrope walker in 'Thus Sprague Zarathustra' .. his most "inspired work IMO ..

Hmm.. If we are in "transtemporal" dimensional phasespaces .. and the denouement of this continuum is likely a forgone conclusion (the contraction and absorbtion of this "Bang")... then possibly a uniform field throughout the whole?... With the variances being both the awareness and consciousness of this "identity" in its varied constituents? .. purely speculative and intangible zones... the finger has no place to point when outside of "flatland" .. PD Ouspensky's 'Tertium Organum'(prior to his meeting Gurdjieff) IMO was his most "inspired" work ...

Answer 7

Lets take a look at who God is. He is a man right. What do men love most? Well women. Does God have any women in his life?
Not that I can see. He was never married. Only had sex once, Mary, and is very old. his hearing is going, sight is bad, has nothing left to do.

He is out of a job.

Answer 8

hey god is neither dead nor alive he is just a super power a power that makes things happen and there is no such thing like big bang

Answer 9

The one who would be dead wouldn't be God anyway since one of God's characteristics is immortality.

Answer 10

I think he's what you choose him to be (not being sexist by using the male, pronoun for the creator, just using convention).

If you feel he's dead, he's dead for you. If some thinks he's Allah, he Allah for that person, or Bhagwan, or Jesus's father, or whatever.

All the best!
st