Is God the initiator of the "singularity" we call the "Big Bang"?

Question

Apologetics is essentially the study of Christian theology as it
compares to other worldviews in order to give a defense of faith and to challenge others' beliefs.

With this in mind, there appear to be divergent views, especially among theologians, regarding the "Big Bang" theory. Is God the explanation of the origins of the universe as the initiator of the "spacetime singularity" we call the "Big Bang?"

What are your thoughts?

Answer 1

".... It would be perfectly consistent with all we know to say that there was a Being who was responsible for the laws of physics". Stephen Hawking....American Scientist, 73, (1985).

Answer 2

This is barely a question, but: If you are to accept the traditional definition of God as being an entity which is both omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent, and then turn to science to identify him, then what really fits those categories? The answer: The Universe, everything. The universe (or multiverse, or omniverse, if you prefer) is, by definition, everything. Therefore it is all-pervading. The universe contains and consists of all powers and forces that might be. Therefore, it is omnipotent. The universe contains all knowledge, for it contains both the brains of all creatures that are capable of knowing things and at the same time, all things that can be known. Given this definition, does this make God the universe, or the reverse? The state of the universe being hot and dense or in its current form is irrelevant - the pattern hold throughout time. God, universe, Universe, god. If you accept this, should it change the way you address either of them? Should scientists approach the mysteries of the world with blind faith and dogmatism? Should people cease to pray, knowing that the only way their deity can hear them is by them speaking to those with ears, and even then, no answer would come? Well, I doubt it. Edit: "being that all knowledge and our minds are connected to the universe then wouldn't we be able to tap into this enormous energy source that powers the Universe?" No, that doesn't follow at all. Our minds are part of the physical arrangement of the unverse, true, and i suppose it's possible to regard the universe as being fundamentally constructed of forces or energy. However, to infer that this means we can somehow consciously control matter is a massive logical leap. Why should the movement of energy in the matter that is our brains have any ability to move the rest of the universe in any way beyond that which it already does? (This being, of course, through our bodies). To say that our minds can somehow 'tap into' the rest of the universe (the universe itself, i don't know where you got the idea there was some kind seperate power source) is as ludicrous as to suggest that anything from a chihuahua to a raindrop to a small rock might do the same thing, at any point.

Answer 3

The Big Bang theory has flaws because there are real contradictions in the science of matter and antimatter and the whole physics of it all. A single huge explosion should put the epicenter at the center of the universe and everything would tend to go outward away from the center like Fourth of July fireworks. But that's not what we see in the cosmos. We have galaxies spinning in wrong directions and gravitational pulls the override the thermodynamic laws that should be occurring if it happened as the theory suggests.
Philosophically it is not illogical to suggest that there is no infinite-personal-creator- since highly order systems are products of intelligent design. ie the just right planet Earth that is a life support system with multiple functions for sustaining life as we know it. That's hard to come by accident and defies all the laws of probability.

Answer 4

Whether it was the chicken or the egg that came first is irrelevant until you find an ultimate point of orgin. In other words an Orgin that needs no orgin, or a Great uncaused Cause. No matter the how of the universe until you admit there is a Creator outside universal law.

Whatever scientist come up with as a theory for the universe it runs into an omnipotent brick wall . And an honest scientist will admit that they can go no further, because every natural cause needs a cause separate from it. Earth's science binds itself to a need for a creator....big bang or whatever

Answer 5

I had in my possession a good book called the case for the creator By Lee Strobel. Unfortunately I loaned it to my brother who loaned it to someone else. He had an interesting section covering that topic exploring many of the different positions which are held. Sadly I wouldn't be able to do justice to the topic from what I remember but it was a worthwhile read. At one point he even was using Stephen Hawking's explanation which relied on imaginary numbers which he later admitted didn't really exist. Anyhow if you have a open mind and can get a hold of a copy try to. If not try asking the guy who my brother lent it out to.

Answer 6

That smacks of just plain wanting God to exist rather than needing a god as an explanation.

Especially since God being around before the Big Bang means God is not accounted for--where did she come from? If she had no divine origin, then why does the universe need a divine origin? (I could mention relative complexity of creator versus created, but I don't buy that line when theists bring it up, so I'm not going to toss it out now.)

Answer 7

There are going to be divergent views on such a difficult question. I'll tell you what - if we discover the origin of the Universe, we may be presented with an even more impossible question after that, and chances are people will still turn to 'God' to explain a seemingly unanswerable answer.

Answer 8

Timothy, I certainly do. The expansion and shaping of the universe is such that is it varied early on we would not be here. I read the odds were something like 1 in 1 x 10^85 that the universe formed in just the right way for life to emerge. That number is basically zero in any scientific sense (most scientific evidence is accepted at .05

Answer 9

M Theory suggests that it was caused by a collision in the underlying frame work of two other universes. I think I'll stick with that until there is a little more evidence.

The big problem with your idea is that it disagrees with the Bible and every other holy text ever written. Doesn't really sound like you think any of them are actually the word of god to me.

Answer 10

To answer the 'bold question':

Probably not.

Why do I say that? Because there are an immeasurable number of natural hypotheses that can exist, and one would have to rule out ALL of them before it would make ANY sense to even CONSIDER any supernatural agent (of which the Christian God is an example).

The God Hypothesis is premature--'jumping the gun,' if you will.