Intelligent Design was involved even if God created through evolutionary creation. Atheistic Evolution cannot be true because there must be someone who has always been since time seems to always have existed. The problem is this: Time has no mind. The Intelligent Designer must be a being that is greater than time; therefore, there must be God. Remember this equation: God + 0 = Creation. No Designer + 0 = Just Zero. Have a Merry Christmas!
I consider this to be a Truism!
Sorry but your statement is not correct. Time has not always existed. Time began at the instant of the Big Bang when spacetime began expanding. This is accepted as scientific fact whether God exists or not.
@Patrick, @Realates, @Eddie, @TedDavis
I know what you are saying, Patrick. I respect what you are saying concerning time, and it could be true. You would say that it must be true; however, how do we ultimately know that it is? I know this will sound like a Young Earther, which is something I am not. However, we were not there at that “time.” How do we really know since we were not there? The question is this: can eternity be looked upon as a type of time? What was before the Big Bang; something in which I believe. If the Big Bang took place and I believe it did, then it must have taken place in something. The question now is this: what is that something? It is eternity; however, what is eternity? It becomes a circular argument for which there seems to be no answer. Our brains are not evolved enough to answer it; however, the mind of God can. He is not speaking in reference to this. Have you heard something that I have not? Do you have a time machine, in which you travelled to the Big Bang? However, if there is absolutely nothing before the Big Bang, you could not travel to it. And if you have no way to protect yourself from the reversal of time, you would unwind like a clock that is running down until you have returned to the moment in which you were conceived. Do consider what I am saying. I am considering your statement. Also, there is a God. If there weren’t, then nothing would come from nothing. That is impossible. It is true that the evidence seems to declare that there was a beginning to our time; however, can you ultimately prove that? The answer is no. Have we come to the point that we believe we know everything? I am afraid we do not. I do hope you will take that into consideration. If we knew everything, then we would be “gods” and we are certainly not. Compare the greatest of creation to ourselves. We are like ants on the earth, aren’t we? Do not say that I am incorrect; on the contrary, you must say I may be incorrect. Also, I ask BioLogos to practice what they preach: opened mindedness. Please do not delete this. What I am saying makes logical sense. Does anyone else agree? Please let me know either way. That is how we can learn from each other. Ted, let my statement stand whether you agree with it or not. Also Patrick, I am not trying to belittle you in anyway. You are a great guy to speak with. Also, I made an edit and was asked to add the reason. Perhaps I did not know enough about that issue to suggest it, i.e., The Miller Experiment. What is wrong with that? Henry
I don’t know where to begin. If you are talking about modern physics well I can add to the discussion but if you are talking about metaphysics well I know nothing about that. Also I don’t know much about the Miller experiment except that it is now longer relevant as it has been determined that conditions on the early Earth were vastly different from what that experiment assumed.
Can I ask you something? How do you know that Lincoln was shot? You were not there.
I do not ultimately know that history was correct; however, there are pictures of Lincoln on his death bed. There was a funeral and Vice President Andrew Johnson became president. Lincoln was no longer on the stage of history. It could have been a conspiracy. Perhaps Secretary Stanton wanted a puppet in the White House like Johnson. Johnson was an alcoholic as far as we know. He stayed drunk most of the time as far as we know. Perhaps Lincoln was hidden somewhere; however, is that logical? Would it not be safer to have Lincoln killed so that the puppet Andrew Johnson could become president so that Secretary Stanton could run the show? I ask you: which is more logical? which is more safe? You are a thinking man. Think about it! Now I will pose a theory to you. You say that the Big Bang “took place” and space and time began. If there is no type of time what so ever, how could the big bag occur? Tell me that. If there is absolutely no time of any kind, how could it occur? Hard one, isn’t it? If there is no time now, how can an automobile accident occur? There were human witnesses to the Lincoln event even though they could have somehow been wrong; however, is that logical? There were NO human beings at the Big Bang. How can an even happen without some type of existence? I respect you knowledge; however, how can you answer that? You can’t really, can you? No, I will not cancel. My argument makes good sense. I want the good doctor to answer. I still respect him. Also, what was the point of matter that existed before the Big Bang existing in, if there were no kind of time at all? What is the blackness our space exist in and how do you know that? At least, my grandparents on my father’s side lived near the time of Lincoln. There parents were there, i.e., my great-grandparents. My great-grandfather, Andrew Miller, was born in 1850. His brother, Jonathan Miller, was a sgt in the Union Army. That could have lied; however, the pictures and graves prove differently. Do you really have a picture of the Big Bang when it happened. Do not use the concept of distant lights coming to earth. This would go against your question to me. Do you have an actual photograph taken in the moment of the Big Bang? Again, I ask: In what did the Big Bang occur? Please respond to the questions. It is always a pleasure to talk with you. I truly mean that. Wish my wife and I could meet you. Your question was good, but not as strong as mine.
So you accept that Lincoln was shot based on the evidence that you have examined. Very Good. You used your intelligence and reasoning to accept Lincoln being shot as fact and didn’t rely on other people’s opinion or dictates. Nobody told you to believe that Lincoln was shot, you came up with that as a reasonable review of all the evidence. And if new facts emerge, you can go back and modify your conclusions and change your mind about Lincoln. Seems like you operate with good intelligence and reasoning skills.
Regarding the Big Bang, I live down the street from the Horn antenna that Penzias and Wilson used to measure noise coming from all over the sky. They were not looking for this noise but they were given the assignment in 1964 to build the lowest noise amplifier that they could use to improve on satellite communications that AT&T was doing at the time (Telstar). To test their low noise amplifier with the horn antenna, they pointed the antenna to the sky. But everywhere they pointed the horn antenna, they got this noise coming in from the sky. All day, all night, all summer, all winter. Every direction, up down, at the horizon, straight up. This noise was coming in, and at the same noise temperature - about 3 degrees above absolute zero. They wrote a one-page paper about this noise and were awarded the Nobel Prize. What do you think this noise is?
I like what you have written. As I have said, he have no doubt that the Big Bang happened. As the Gospel of John says and I quote: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing was that came into being.” This statement that is from the New Revised Standard Version implies an existence prior to the Big Bang. If there had been such an existence, the Big Bang must have been a part of it. You need to answer my question: what did the Big Bang come to existence in if there had been no type of time at all? Also, I know this gets into metaphysics; however, we need to learn from each other. A great mind must have caused it that existed in this “eternal time” that has no beginning and no end. As it is said, I am the Alpha and the Omega. The Big Bang was an event; therefore, what I wish to call “pre-time” existed. Boy, I am really enjoying this, Patrick. The tennis ball is in your court. I understand there is a Big Bang; however, there must be something in which it occurred. Interesting, isn’t it? And who caused it? Remember 0+0=0. I wish to ask one other question. What holds outer space, our cosmos? On earth, even the atmosphere is held by gravity evn though we cannot see it. In the room I am in, tables and chairs are on the floor. Things are on the tables. The atmosphere of the earth is held by gravity. What holds our cosmos? Something else to think about.
I don’t really understand your question. But if your question is “where and when did the Big bang occur”?, I will answer you with the best data I know of and that is from the Planck Satellite 2015 papers.
From 2009 to 2013, the Planck Satellite measured the noise that Penzias and Wilson measured in Holmdel NJ 50 years ago from space and with far greater resolution. From these measurements, it is calculated that the Big Bang occurred 13.799 billion years ago. The accuracy of this result is ± 21 million years. So that is the “when” answer.
For the “where” answer, we use the fact that when we look into a telescope today, all the galaxies are moving away from us. The universe is expanding in all directions. If it is expanding now, it must have been smaller ten minutes ago and smaller yet yesterday. If we calculate backwards in time 13.799 billion years ago, the whole universe was the size of a proton right here inside this dot on the screen.
There you go. That is everything we know now.
As for before the Big Bang, I know nothing.
Henry, I am puzzled why you think that we’d just delete something simply b/c it’s your opinion. We invite everyone to speak here, whether or not we share their views. We have only an expectation of respectful dialogue. Brad decided to split this topic out from his column, b/c it’s not closely pertinent to his topic, but we do that all the time and don’t delete ideas in the process.
That’s not been my experience, incidentally, at one prominent site that promotes an alternative position, namely uncommondescent.com. Several times I’ve discovered that facts and opinions I’ve put there have simply vanished without a trace–most recently, when I put a link to my reply to a column they linked, attacking BL. I did no more than invite their readers to read my reply for themselves.
That’s not our practice here.
Therefore, you are willing to admit that there are things which science cannot answer. The next question I would like for you to respond to is this if you have not already: How could something on its own come from a non-thinking nothing? I would like a logical answer. Also, You are a great partner, Patrick.
The system came up with a message to cancel what I was saying. Please accept my apologies.
No, I don’t admit any such thing. I don’t know the limits of science. But I do know that science can figure out things that were once thought to be unknowable. I really think that science can answer a lot more about the Big Bang and how it happened and why it happened. I also think science can answer “does praying help or harm people/society”? and of course, science can answer “Does belief in an afterlife, helps or harms people/society”? And of course science is great at investigating the past. That is why we have forensic science - to investigate what happened in the past, how it happened, and why it happened. I can’t wait to know when, where, how, and why we became human.
This question should be for Non-BioLogos supporters. BioLogos has already established it’s positon: God, a THINKING BEING, directed the creation of THINKING life.
In fact, when a topic is split off it can actually draw a greater readership as people see it as an interesting topic in its own right. (For instance, I read this topic when I’d never seen it buried in a much longer conversation.) So it’s almost the opposite of deleting it.
I appreciate @BradKramer’s careful curating of these comment threads, although just to read all these comments must take half his work day…
Since you asked me privately for a reply to your idea, @Henry, I’ll offer one–but not a lengthy one. The question of the “origin” of time, if we might speak that way, is a very deep one metaphysically and therefore also theologically. The two poles of the conversation could be represented by Augustine and Isaac Newton. For Augustine, God created time along with the universe, which therefore was not created “in time.” On the other hand, Newton believed that we can make sense of the claim that “God exists everywhere and always,” only if we conceive of time and space as uncreated entities. Otherwise, in his opinion, we cannot coherently say that “God has always been everywhere,” for example.
Since this is a side issue I won’t prolong this, but your opinions are always welcome, Henry.
I am not defending Patrick, but technically he is right. Time and space came into existence with the creation of matter/energy which caused the Big Bang. There was nothing, no time, no space, no matter, no energy before the Beginning or the Big Bang. I am glad to see that Patrick does say that there was a Beginning, because before he was endorsing a book by Kraus which said that there was no real Beginning.
Your argument is reasonable, but it is not provable or scientific. Science cannot take us past the Big Bang, although some scientists are trying to do so because they do not like the concept of the Beginning. Logic and philosophy can, but most people have given up on philosophy, which means that humans have lost a tool for resolving questions like these.
One issue which has not been explored is the fact that time and evolution are relational, which means that they are both change and continuity. Science in the form of Dawkins’ thought is monistic in the form of change, but time is not random change, but orderly change. Thus time and evolution are change with continuity, which scientific monism cannot explain.
The philosophy of Time is very important. I recommend a paper by Ryan Mullins, entitled “Is God is a Prisoner of Time? Yeah, But So What,” found on Academia.edu, My paper, “God and Freedom” are there also, if you are interested.
Patrick, I must disagree with you. No human being has all the answers. Can answers be discovered, yes they can. Can you disprove life after death? The answer is no. There are areas that a philosopher must examine also. I do know this for sure. 0+0= a big zero. Something must have been there in eternity past that could create. Something this is living and cares. Yes, there are problems in this world and all of us wonder why they must happen. All I can say on that issue is this: we are free-thinking beings who are allowed to make decisions on our own. One day we will have to account for these. That includes both of us. You are still not really able to admit that science and man’s knowledge do not have all the answers. We must seek them; however, we cannot always find them. I am sorry that science does not show to you that something cannot come from nothing. There must be more than you have said. I wish you could see that; however, God has given you the free will to make your decision. I have a belief about time and I wish to express it for you. I hope you do not mind. Time is like a column of building blocks. The past, present, and future exist all at the same time. I believe in Second Advent of Christ. Eternity will come into time one day. I believe also that when a person dies, he steps out of time into eternal time. What does the dead person then experience? The person experiences the Second Coming of Jesus. This person already has his resurrection body and lives on the new earth. C.S. Lewis, a one time atheist, believed that. I would like to quote a book by Dr. J. P. Moreland, a former professor of mine when I was working on my MA in Religion. Please read it! Here is the quote: “The second nontraditional view is the perspectival position. It claims the following: Sometimes scientific advances legitimately change our understanding of biblical passages. No one today believes the sun literally rises and sets, nor do we think that when the angels cross a flat earth. Time is part of the created order and belongs entirely to this world. In the same way, we now know that time is part of the space-time physical-universe, and time is relative to a frame of reference. Suppose there are twins A and B. If A remains on earth while B travels in a spaceship near the speed of light, B will be younger than A when he arrives back on earth. Time shrinks with increased velocity. Further, two events can appear simultaneous to one observer, and they can appear to happen at different times to a second observer in a rapidly moving spaceship flying overhead. Whatever happens to persons after death, we have no reason to believe they remain in our space-time system. According to the perspectival view, when a believer dies, he goes to be with Christ and receives a resurrection body. From his perspective, there is no time gap between death and bodily entrance into Christ’s presence. But from our perspective here on earth, there is a time interval between death and resurrection. The whole problem of the intermediate state’s being a literal state of disembodiment arises because we erroneously view the state of the dead from our time-bound perspective.” I hope this gives you food for thought. If you were to accept John Chapter 3, you might be discussing this with me in heaven. If not, I probably will not see you and that will be sad. I have opened my mind to yours. I hope you will be reasonable and open up your mind to my views as well. You are a very educated man; therefore, you should be able to consider other options than your own. I have considered yours; now consider mine, or are you afraid to do so? I hope not. Best wishes for the season friend Patrick. I mean it too. Do you mean it when you say it? I wonder. God bless you. Also, eternity must be a type of time too since the Big Bang happened at a point of reference. I know who caused the Big Bang. Goodbye for now. Perhaps I may join another BioLogos group. I am finished with this topic.
How can an even occur in absolutely no point of reference? I am not talking about time as we know it, but eternal time or better yet, the eternal NOW. Roger, your answer is still a great one. I wish to thank you for the paper you recommended. I will probably read it tomorrow if I can find it on the web. Merry Christmas.
You are correct, my friend; however, Patrick does not seem to believe this. I was trying to make a point to him. God bless.