Genesis I verses 2-3/The Big Bang
Anybody getting this? Because this is some good stuff! We're taking on a discussion of Genesis Chapter 1 through 31. We have discussed Genesis 1:1 in my previous post. We continue with Genesis 2 - 3 and how close the literal lines of Bible resembles a poetic version of evolution. Suck on that Creationists.
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
It's not hard to make the leap from the passages above to what scientists have described as the universe before the Big Bang. Of course it's not fit for Science Digest, and is more in the line of Def Poetry Jam, but definitely similar in substance. And, it's a great set up for the next line.
3 And God said, Let there be light and there was light.
And God said in a big booming voice "Let there be light!" And a Big Bang later, there was light. This is great writing guys. Think about verse 2. How it's ominous, frightening, full of scary words like void, darkness, deep. What a lead in for the creation of light with all it's positive connotations. Scientists have no better way of describing it's popping into existence.
For light: read primordial photon. Now, I'm in no way an expert on this, I know a little and that in itself is a dangerous thing, and perhaps after reading this someone will write a complete dissertation, but I do know that the expansion of primordial photons even today echo the creation of this ever expanding universe. Clearly the writers of this Bible passage new the importance of light in the equation of creation, and like scientists of today had no explanation of how the light came to be. It's creation number one on the list of God's tasks. The only difference is the Bible attributes it to an all powerful being; The scientists say, I don't know. To have faith or not to have faith, as it were. All that's left is to interpret your God in a way that you can understand him. It's only natural for a scientist to say God can't be proven therefore God doesn't exist, but it's so unimaginative. Isn't it? The writers of the Bible created this omnipotent super being, much more Saturday night cinema continuing saga than the stunted scientific finality of "I don't know."
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
It's not hard to make the leap from the passages above to what scientists have described as the universe before the Big Bang. Of course it's not fit for Science Digest, and is more in the line of Def Poetry Jam, but definitely similar in substance. And, it's a great set up for the next line.
3 And God said, Let there be light and there was light.
And God said in a big booming voice "Let there be light!" And a Big Bang later, there was light. This is great writing guys. Think about verse 2. How it's ominous, frightening, full of scary words like void, darkness, deep. What a lead in for the creation of light with all it's positive connotations. Scientists have no better way of describing it's popping into existence.
For light: read primordial photon. Now, I'm in no way an expert on this, I know a little and that in itself is a dangerous thing, and perhaps after reading this someone will write a complete dissertation, but I do know that the expansion of primordial photons even today echo the creation of this ever expanding universe. Clearly the writers of this Bible passage new the importance of light in the equation of creation, and like scientists of today had no explanation of how the light came to be. It's creation number one on the list of God's tasks. The only difference is the Bible attributes it to an all powerful being; The scientists say, I don't know. To have faith or not to have faith, as it were. All that's left is to interpret your God in a way that you can understand him. It's only natural for a scientist to say God can't be proven therefore God doesn't exist, but it's so unimaginative. Isn't it? The writers of the Bible created this omnipotent super being, much more Saturday night cinema continuing saga than the stunted scientific finality of "I don't know."