TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

did the big bang also create God?

the soup that all of this came from was created from nothing and if that is true then there was nothing before their was something and since we have no proof of why it happened it would have to be put down to happenstance.I am sure that my theory is too simple so if there is someone who can give me a better theory have at it

Share:

Closing Statement from arthur mitsias

there is a God not in the Universe but in us and this is something that has been nurtured in every culture and every culture thought they were the chosen ones and that they knew what God wanted,man gave God an ego and all we really want God to do is answer the questions that have been asked for countless eons ,why?and how? And as far as athiests and those that believe in God they have one thing in common moments of doubt

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jul 20 2012: Your argument is based on an assumption that nothing existed before the big bang. That assumption is based on opinion, not fact.

    It is equally possible that the big bang is just one in a sequence of infinite big bangs that oscillate between expansion and contraction. That is also an opinion, but one that makes more sense to me than something out of nothing. On the other hand, if there was something before the big bang, it is beyond our ability to figure it out.

    As Murphy one said; an easily understood workable falsehood has more value than an incomprehensible truth. That being said, is God an easily understood workable falsehood? That depends on how you define it. There are many conceptions of God which are man-made. Any man-made conception of God is false. But is there a God that transcends any man-made conception?

    The church defines God as supreme being. Being means existence. It does not necessarily imply personage. That is what we have ascribed to the definition because of how we interpret Genesis; God created man in his own image, so we reverse this to signify that God must be in the image of a man. But that is not what it says, that is all we can figure out from the scripture. The idea that our creative ability is what makes us made in the image of the creator never seems to come into the argument. But if that were true, then the creator is that which is doing the creating, and may have nothing to do with what we imagine it to be.

    Quantum fields are what is doing the creating. They are everywhere and they are invisible. If that is what God is, then it changes the whole argument. We know that religion has disputed science because of what it has come to believe. But such beliefs were built on definitions that were also man-made. We may come to conclude that the dispute is based on definitions that were never valid to begin with.
    • Jul 21 2012: Roy ,everything you wrote is theory,its just that some theories have a larger following and is excepted as"excuse the example"gospel.
      • thumb
        Jul 21 2012: Arthur,
        You are correct. When the church divorced itself from science, it was a step in the wrong direction and it has only gotten worse with time. So how do we fix it?

        I have a sense for the word God that most people don't have, and the accepted definition doesn't fit what I have experienced. So I wrote a book.
        • Jul 23 2012: Religion is not science, and until religious beliefs become parallel to scientific knowledge without trying to jumble the facts around to fit their beliefs, religion should stay separate. But, that does not mean that religious people cannot be good scientists, just look at Ken Miller, the other 40% of the scientific community, and the other 7% of the advanced scientific community. But, since religion seems to conflict with science, a religious person doing science has to learn to set aside their religious beliefs and have faith that the truth will prevail.

          Religion has to realize that science isn't the enemy but instead their best friend, because it is their best chance at ever proving God. If God doesn't exist then there will be nothing that is explained with God that can't be explained with something else. But, if God does exist science will find him some day.

          My 2 cents.

          *edit BTW I would love to see them come back together, but it's going to take some creative thinking on science's part, and some evolution on religion's part (puns intended). In short science has to learn to think like non- scientists in order to communicate in a way that can be understood and resonates with people, and religion needs to learn the importance of evidence and accuracy.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.