This conversation is closed.
Is there any difference between belief in the Big Bang and religion?
According to religion, God gave us the universe; according to science, Chance gave us the "Big Bang". In society today we can choose between a modified Intelligent Design (Deism) where the odds are so stacked against a physical cause of the universe being “coincidental i.e. Chance” as to border on fantasy.
Instead the BB, a pseudo-religion, wants society to pay homage to astrophysicists and mathematicians who bring us the “God” of Chance.
“Religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances…”*.
There is very little difference between religion and mainstream belief in the BB.
Even when we see old galaxies literally a few hundred million years after the BB "which shouldn't be there"---oh wait---we can appeal to another "adjustable parameter", if we are to believe in the sanctity of the BB at 13.7 billion years ago..
Astrophysicists try to determine the nature and purpose of the universe and they rely on the supernatural agency of Chance. They also engage in devotional and ritual observances. These are conferences and articles where the assembled are required to profess their faith in the BB
“He (Dr. Tom van Flandern) opened his abstract with the words, ‘The Big Bang has never achieved a true prediction success where the theory was placed at risk of falsification before the results were known.’”.
I was wondering if others would find the devotion to Chance as the causal mechanism of the universe any different from Deism as the cause of the universe.