The Big Bang and Secularism (creation, theist, agnostic, eternal)

[MatCauthorn]

I have been wavering back and forth among atheism, agnosticism, and deism for some time now, and my latest point of thought is that of the Big Bang. As far as I can see, this is the biggest "problem" facing people who posit the non-existence of any God/gods - what/who caused the Big Bang to occur, the universe cannot be uncaused so it must have been caused by God, etc. I think that the only reason this argument isn't used more often by theists is because the simple fact that the universe exists doesn't imply anything about God's qualities (like His being loving) or about any of the other things usually associated with religion (souls and heaven and such).

I've read the usual responses to the problem -- the universe could be eternal, it doesn't make sense to say that the universe must have a cause and then posit a God which does not have a cause, etc.

Does anyone know of any good arguments for why the existence of the universe at all is not evidence for the existence of God?

Thanks in advance for the help!

-- Mat

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by MatCauthorn

... Does anyone know of any good arguments for why the existence of the universe at all is not evidence for the existence of God?

Thanks in advance for the help!

-- Mat

M-Theory, a cosomological explanation of string theory.

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by MatCauthorn

Does anyone know of any good arguments for why the existence of the universe at all is not evidence for the existence of God?

Well.... it may seem strange to have me answer this.... but:

I have been told that it is a scientific principle that energy and matter can not create themselves.... you can not go from nothing- to something.. in nature.

.... but that does not mean it was God.... or if it is a "god" that it is the God of the Bible.

Evidence? Sure.

Proof? No.

[Tawn]

Well if we observe the laws of nature, nothing can be created or destroyed.. only transformed.. so it seems to me that there is little evidence of creation.
The big bang theory is fine and everything, but im not aware of any evidenced theories as to what there was prior to the big bang.

Seems to me theres two ways you can think:

1. There was no creation. The laws of nature suggest this.
2. We just dont know and ignorance is not a good reason for resorting to belief in a God.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by pah

M-Theory, a cosomological explanation of string theory.

Indeed, lots of hyperspatial membranes running around - two happened to bang into one another and cablamo! our universe was born.

There's as much evidence for M-theory as there is for God though.

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by Tawn

Well if we observe the laws of nature, nothing can be created or destroyed.. only transformed.. so it seems to me that there is little evidence of creation.
The big bang theory is fine and everything, but im not aware of any evidenced theories as to what there was prior to the big bang.

Seems to me theres two ways you can think:

1. There was no creation. The laws of nature suggest this.
2. We just dont know and ignorance is not a good reason for resorting to belief in a God.

There is mathmatical evidence of the cause of the Big Bang. It is in the ongoing developement of M-Theory. It stems from the new theory of atomic structure, String Theory. Everything is comprised of stings, a one dimensional object that vibrates. It satisifies the herebefore quantum mechanics and Einstein's therory of relativity. On the comological level strings exist in 10 dimension in sheets called membranes. The "branes" consist of strings. When the branes collide this causes Big Bangs and a universe is formed for each and every collision. An oversimplification perhaps but a seriously studied phenomenon pursued by science.

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Indeed, lots of hyperspatial membranes running around - two happened to bang into one another and cablamo! our universe was born.

There's as much evidence for M-theory as there is for God though.

There are formulae for M-Theory and strings but not for God

[Halcyon]

There is mathmatical evidence of the cause of the Big Bang.

There's more than jkust maths as evidence for the big bang (as i'm sure pah is aware), the universal background radiation being the big one, along with the general expansion of the universe.

There are formulae for M-Theory and strings but not for God

Personally i have a problem with any theory that relies purely on mathematics (just as you do with theories that rely entirely on faith). Just because something is mathematically possible, doesn't make it probably or even likely.

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Nothing in M-Theory disputes the Big Bang it only shows that the Bibg Bang is no longer a singularity. What happens after the brane collisions is still the Big Bang.

I believe it was Newton that created calculus to show the observed orbits of the planets. The proof, before the telescopic measurement, was mathmatics.