Pope Benedict: God responsible for Big Bang and universe creation

Typical religion...anything science currently has not explained = God. Give it a few years (whatever, 2 or 200) and once this is resolved, then god will be attributed to whatever happened before that (who created the membranes that creates big bangs all over the place randomly, etc).

Its good to keep a open mind and wanting to seek answers to things...he is trying to stick a age old answer in. That is a disservice to actual seeking of knowledge

no change there then.

It is a interesting angle though, So, you got the vatican now finally coming around and accepting the big bang..and evolution I imagine will be the next step for full acceptance. Of course, there are plenty that will remain genesis style creation story despite what the pope says...but I guess its a step in the right direction..sort of.

Now we can all laugh at the creationist theme park

I'm agnostic. I believe some power is at work, just not one supreme being.

I find Benedict's words somewhat bizarre. If you read Genesis God created the world in 7 days. Seven days to create planets, animals, night, day etc.

For years the argument between science and faith has raged. Science claiming it was all started by the big bang and everything produced as a result of the big bang has taken millions of years to develop and evolve. Faith argued it was all done in a week.

Now Benedict is saying God was responsible for the big bang. Sounds like years of scientific theory has finally got under the skin of the Vatican, and to nullify the argument they're trying to draw a line under it by saying "Look he was responsible for all that too okay?"

God either created things in a week, or over millions of years. Good old Benedict sounds like he's now hedging his bets in an attempt to undermine hundreds of years of scientific PROOF.

reply to post by ALadInsane


So your what...agnostic atheist, or agnostic theist? Agnostic simply is stating you are not sure...but you need a second part to sum up your stance on a deity...are you not sure, but believe there is a god (not sure which religion, but pretty sure some sort of deity is running things), or not sure, but see no evidence in any deities so far...still open to the concept, but want to see proof before belief..

the second version makes you agnostic atheist.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
reply to post by ALadInsane

 

So your what...agnostic atheist, or agnostic theist? Agnostic simply is stating you are not sure...but you need a second part to sum up your stance on a deity...are you not sure, but believe there is a god (not sure which religion, but pretty sure some sort of deity is running things), or not sure, but see no evidence in any deities so far...still open to the concept, but want to see proof before belief..

the second version makes you agnostic atheist.

Accepting either of those forms suggests I believe there could be a specific deity responsible for the creation of everything. I say agnostic because I believe something created everything, just not one specific God that has done nothing since to suggest it was them. Both of those stances lead to the ultimate conclusion a deity could be responsible. For all we know the big bang could be an experiment by a race of advanced beings. It could simply be a force we've yet to understand. It doesn't have to be about a God waving his hand and it being so.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Typical religion...anything science currently has not explained = God. Give it a few years (whatever, 2 or 200) and once this is resolved, then god will be attributed to whatever happened before that (who created the membranes that creates big bangs all over the place randomly, etc).

Its good to keep a open mind and wanting to seek answers to things...he is trying to stick a age old answer in. That is a disservice to actual seeking of knowledge

no change there then.

It is a interesting angle though, So, you got the vatican now finally coming around and accepting the big bang..and evolution I imagine will be the next step for full acceptance. Of course, there are plenty that will remain genesis style creation story despite what the pope says...but I guess its a step in the right direction..sort of.

Now we can all laugh at the creationist theme park

OK, Saturn, did you see where I pointed out that a priest was the originator of the Big Bang theory? The Pope is simply reasserting something that the Catholic church has always known...
For the benefit of the likes of you, I think!
Vicky

To quote Ricky Gervais, "god is a c**t."

I really despise the new pope and worry about the direction they are heading in, then again I've despised the catholic church since day one and worry for them in general.

To be quite honest, I don't really care what the pope has to say.

Originally posted by yaphun
reply to post by Vicky32

 

Sorry you are offended, but it is my opinion and it is not like a super outlandish claim.
Would you also be offended if I said yahweh is the most brutal and unjust character in all of fiction ?

Annoyed, offended and above all, bored! Youse guys are nothing if not predictable...
Your opinion is worth the same as mine, btw... You don't know anything obviously - and your referring to God as a character in fiction is obviously meant to upset me. Tough. It didn't work - because I've read Dawkins and Hitchens, and all the atheist websites they recommend - even Pharungula, so don't bother quoting that as well... Grow up, don't be such a big baby, and stop trying to upset people. What are you, 15 years old?
Vicky

Good for the Pope and good for another 2000 years of lies. What a bunch of doodoo.

I'm sorry to interrupt some bickering, but this is all that came to mind.

"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."
~Douglas Adams

I didn't know that this Pope fellow believed in God, fancy that, thanks for making that clear buddy.

You can't really expect the Pope to come out with a better argument than “God did it and you can’t prove that he didn’t!”, that's his job!

Originally posted by Vicky32

Grow up, don't be such a big baby, and stop trying to upset people. What are you, 15 years old?
Vicky

I recommend while sticking up for your imaginary friend not to be so quick to judge anyones maturity or age.

I would never recommend a theist to a "atheist site". I will how ever recommend they pick up a book or two on biology, cosmology and maybe one that covers the basics of science in general.

I recently posted this in another thread, but thought it would apply here:

Rudolph Steiner (Theosophy - Waldorf Schools) once referenced to an experiment used in elementary schools to "teach" children how the universe began. The students dropped a spat of oil in a bowl of water, and the pricked the blob with a pin. This caused several little blobs to spin off, showing how the stars and planets were created. Rudolph then asked, "Ok, with regard to the Universe, who pricked the pin?"

I am not looking to engage. Just something to ponder.

Originally posted by yaphun

Originally posted by Vicky32

Grow up, don't be such a big baby, and stop trying to upset people. What are you, 15 years old?
Vicky

I recommend while sticking up for your imaginary friend not to be so quick to judge anyones maturity or age.

I would never recommend a theist to a "atheist site". I will how ever recommend they pick up a book or two on biology, cosmology and maybe one that covers the basics of science in general.

edit on 7-1-2011 by yaphun because: (no reason given)

Once again, you fail...
I have read many atheist sites (time wasted, sadly) but I have also read science books since I was a child. My two sons both work in the sciences.
You seem to be judging me by the Christian in your head, not by any real ones.
Vicky

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
Could you please prove that Jesus was gay?

No, you cannot.

So please, don't state as fact something you don't have a clue about.

But in your last post, you made these statements without providing proof:

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
This universe was designed, no question.

There could not be random anomalies creating everything that dwells within this universe.

Don't bother providing what you call 'proof' of the above statements. The answer to these questions is not known.

Of course the pope is going to say that religion is right and science is wrong. Duh. He probably believes it and he's HIGHLY invested in others believing it as well. Popes are no different than anyone else. They're fallible. He's just a guy with an opinion.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Typical religion...anything science currently has not explained = God. Give it a few years (whatever, 2 or 200) and once this is resolved, then god will be attributed to whatever happened before that (who created the membranes that creates big bangs all over the place randomly, etc).

Its good to keep a open mind and wanting to seek answers to things...he is trying to stick a age old answer in. That is a disservice to actual seeking of knowledge

Indeed! Richard Dawkins refers to this behaviour as 'The Worship Of Gaps'
"I don't understand, therefore it must be god!"

Creationalists eagerly seek a gap in present-day knowledge or understanding. If an apparent gap is found, it is assumed that GOD, by default, must fill it. What worries thoughtful theologians such as Bonhoeffer is that gaps shrink as science advances, and God is threatened with eventually having nothing to do and nowhere to hide. What worries scientists is something else. It is an essential part of the scientific enterprise to admit ignorance, even to exult in ignorance as a challenge to future conquests. As my friend Matt Ridley has written, "Most scientists are bored by what they have already discovered. It is ignorance that drives them on". Mystics exult in mystery and want it to stay mysterious. Scientists exult in mystery for a different reason: it gives them something to do. More generally, as I shall repeat in Chapter 8, one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.

Admissions of ignorance and temporary mystification are vital to good science. It is therefore unfortunate, to say the least, that the main strategy of creation propagandists is the negative one of seeking out gaps in scientific knowledge and claiming to fill them with 'intelligent design' by default.

- Excerpt from "The God Delusion"
-- By Richard Dawkins

Source

IRM

Is their still doubt amongst some of you that Roman Catholicism is not the same as Biblical Christianity? The Bible could not be any clearer on the Creation account. Hasn't the pope learned his lesson from when the church jumped on the popular "science" bandwagon in the past? They along with the scientists believed the earth was flat, larger objects fall quicker than smaller ones, and that the sun rotated around the earth. They are now 0 for 4.

oops

I think this is a pretty absurd comment to make about the "big bang theory." I nor agree nor disagree with the theory as it does make sense but hasn't been proven. So the pope is claiming God, which also hasn't been proven was behind a theory that also hasn't been proven. I say give it a 1000 years and we can look back and laugh at how primitive religion really was. If Moore's law continues to be right then there is no telling what can be done. It seems that we are only limited by time and personally I think that nothing is impossible, although it may be unprovable at the moment doesn't mean it can't be done eventually. Intel has already stated they can design a 1000 core processor compared to the quad processors currently being used mainstream. These types of advancements really make you wonder about the simulation argument.

Remember people. It’s called The Big Bang "Theory". Not The Big Bang "Fact" Until we can make an instrument to see the big bang, mathematical evidence is all we got, and to a certain degree very little observational evidence. Seeing is believing . But also sometimes; Believing is seeing.