can't just pop a whole universe into existance where there was just a void before. Science is still baffled on this one.
no, ya aint alone.
2006-12-16 03:25:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Reisnoh 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Big Bang Theory and Creationism have long been held as directly opposing views, however, I would like to attempt to combine the two. According to the Big Bang Theory the infinite mass of the universe was all located in one mathematical point. A massive amount of energy just appeared with no explanation as to its appearance, which energy caused the mass to explode, and out came perfectly formed worlds. Hmmmmm. A similar experience. Take a small radio and put it in a pillowcase. Take a hammer and smash it into bits. Then shake the pillowcase just right, so that all the pieces of radio come back together to recreate the perfectly formed radio. Good Luck....
This massive amount of energy came from God. The mass explodes. As the universe is exploding the Lord selected a piece of mass which he called Earth. As it was spirally away from the rest of the exploding mass, it was still extremely hot which would have created molten earth which would be easier for Him to form. Thus began the Creation, and it continued as written in Genesis.
This is not the only planet He created however. He created "worlds without number" (Moses 1:33) in like manner.
Therefore, in my view, both are accurate.
2006-12-16 11:41:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In as much as I was not around to see how everything came into being (and neither were you),I say, "I don't know ..... YET!" To assume that some god, my less than intellectual ancestors made up, instantaneously farted the universe into being, is absurd.
The first sign a species is becoming sentient is when they have evolved to the point where they can abstract enough to invent a god. . It seems that you have a ways to go before reaching that level of intellectual maturity.
2006-12-16 11:26:45
·
answer #3
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are to be commended for coming up with the conclusion that there is a Creator but what are you calling man-made theories? E-mail me--I am intersted.
2006-12-16 11:36:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Sparkle1 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think you're alone at all. Many people believe simply in a higher power, or in the universe, some people would rather personify it with a title, like God or Allah or what ever it may be. I'm glad you even believe in a higher power, to many people want to rationalize all the miracles away, and you know, I don't know that I've ever met a truly happy aetheist, heh.
2006-12-16 11:26:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by cellar_door 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
probably not.
What makes you not believe the man-made theories?
Do you think that the creator would reach out and try to communicate to his creation? I think so.
2006-12-16 11:25:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by misjes2000 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
You're probably not alone, but you have no more evidence for your belief than any other man-made hypothesis. In scientific terminology, a theory requires evidence. That's why evolution is a theory and creationism is not.
2006-12-16 11:24:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you belive in a creator(which is good,you half way into faith) then it would, or should make sense that you believe in God as the creator.
2006-12-16 11:26:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Maurice H 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
are they man made theorys or feeble attempts at passing on an observed truth that is hard to put into words?? Do not mistake the motivation of these who were obviously bright people, and understand they were truly intuitive.
2006-12-16 11:27:08
·
answer #9
·
answered by icheeknows 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
What are some examples of these man-made theories to which you refer.
2006-12-16 11:36:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Uncle Thesis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋