Gravity Waves, the Big Bang, and Creationism

The science world was rocked by the recent news that gravitational waves, the ripples in space time predicted by the Big Bang theory, have in fact been detected by scientists:

What’s more, researchers discovered direct evidence for the first time of what Albert Einstein predicted in his general theory of relativity: Gravitational waves.


These are essentially ripples in space-time, which have been thought of as the “first tremors of the Big Bang,” according to the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.


A telescope at the South Pole called BICEP2—Background Imaging of Cosmic Extragalactic Polarization 2—was critical to the discovery. The telescope allowed scientists to analyze the polarization of light left over from the early universe, leading to Monday’s landmark announcement.

Okay. So what exactly does that mean? Not exactly what you’d expect. Though evolutionists will try, and have tried, to twist these findings to prop up their power, and will probably say something along the lines of, “See this is proof that we’re right about the Big Bang being a purely materialistic event. Science predicted it, and we’ve seen it. So we’re right. And you’re wrong.”

Not so fast. Verification is a multi-faceted thing, and evolutionists have been getting away with what I would call “verification extrapolation” or “truth by association” for too long. For instance, just because natural selection is a proven fact (which it is), that doesn’t mean that natural selection is a mechanism capable of producing all the variety of kinds we currently see. To extrapolate the verification of one part  of your theory into a blanket approval of your entire system of beliefs is at the very least naïve. It might even be called dishonest.

So first off, let’s determine what the detection of gravitational waves (should it hold up to scrutiny) does not prove.

For one, it does not rule out an act of special creation. It would actually support the likelihood of an immediate act of creation. Consider for a moment that very many evolutionists hated the Big Bang theory for that very reason. The Big Bang presupposes that there must have been a time when nothing existed. It assumes that time and space had a beginning.

Some evolutionists choose instead to believe in a non-linear view of the universe—that the universe has constantly flip-flopped through inflation and collapse in a never-ending tumble cycle stretching back into eternity past and stretching into eternity future. A scientific article condemning the Big Bang theory said it like this:

. . . The big bang is not the only framework available for understanding the history of the universe. Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesise an evolving universe without beginning or end. ((Emphasis mine.))

“Without beginning or end.” That allows the evolutionist to continue his idolatry of matter. As Carl Sagan loved to put it: “The cosmos [matter] is all that is, was, or ever will be.” Not according to the Big Bang theory. Matter had a beginning.

So what began it? Was something there before it? That’s not such a stupid idea. Can something come from nothing of its own accord? That doesn’t seem reasonable. But, then again, I’m just an ignorant Christian. I don’t have the same faith in the miraculous power of random chance that all the reason-thumping philosopher kings do.

But there is another crucial point to be made here. The existence of gravitational waves does not prove that the evolutionary scientists’ time-frame is correct either. In fact, it destroys the credibility of the evolutionary time-frame.

Consider for a momet what the Big Bang theory actually postulates: all matter was at one point smashed together in a single point of pure energy (kind of like a “Let there be light” kind of moment or something). Then that point was instantaneously inflated (kind of like a “God stretched the heavens out like a curtain” kind of moment or something). During that inflationary period, time did not function the way it currently does. At all. Things were expanding faster than the speed of light.

In fact, even if you believe the evolutionary time frame, there are stars that are so far away from us, we shouldn’t be able to see their light yet (they are more than 14 billion light-years away from us). But we can. Why? Because some crazy non-Newtonian stuff happens when you start talking about stretching the very fabric of space.

Let’s try to understand something about time. It doesn’t exist in a black hole. At all. Stephen Hawkings’ elegant mathematics concerning black holes resulted in what should have been an unsurprising realization—time is dependent on space. The bigger the space, the “longer” the time. When space constricts down to a singularity—say in a black hole … or right before a Big Bang—time is basically a non-factor. Because it takes no time to span the entire distance of that system. Time inflates with space. Again, this is not that weird. And it doesn’t feel weird to us either. Because time is always functioning in a constant linear fashion within your system of observation for any given time.

But when you start talking about universal space-time, things get really zonky. Einstein knew this. And lots of scientists say they know this. Yet they act like starlight and the expansion of the universe conform to the same blockheaded linear and uniform mechanics as the physics problems I did in high school. And that’s just stupid.

But evolutionists are bound to that simple-minded uniformitarian Newtonian celestial mechanic. Because the thorniest part of the Big Bang theory is the very “inflation” that these gravitational waves evidence. Inflation basically says the universe at its current size could have happened in basically no time at all. (Maybe in a single twenty-four hour period when the stars and the heavens were formed by God? Sure, why not …) The New Yorker explains:

New physics . . . might imply that the universe expanded in size by over thirty orders of magnitude in a tiny fraction of a second after the Big Bang, increasing in size by a greater amount in that instance than it has in the fourteen billion years since . . .

Yeah. Except for one small detail. If inflation on that order is possible, why even include “the fourteen billion years since”? Those years aren’t necessary (like Newtonian physicists once thought they were) in order to explain the size of the universe at its current velocity of expansion. You’re overdetermining the question at that point, you see. You are positing a theory that wouldn’t take fourteen billion years, but refusing to give up your time frame. Occam’s razor condemns you.

Anytime a creationist starts talking about a young universe, an evolutionist astronomer is there to tell him how starlight has traveled on a uniform Newtonian path to us over the past fourteen billion years. And they know this because the expansion of the universe, and red-shifted light, and the Hubble constant, and stars are like really really far away, and blah blah blah.

I have always retorted with a very simple counter-argument: explosions do not conform to linear curves of expansion. They are logarithmic. Meaning they expand quickly at the beginning, but decelerate rapidly. So if the Big Bang is true, why do scientists use the velocity of the Hubble Constant as if the universe has always moved at that velocity? I thought this was a Big Bang, not a Big Drift. Seriously. It’s stupid. But they won’t give it up no matter what. Because they need that time.

Big Bang inflation theory (confirmed by this most recent piece of evidence) just destroys the idea of a slow-grown universe. Who cares if a star is fourteen billion light years away? That just means that light traveling within the current space-time would take fourteen billion years to travel that distance. It apparently could have gotten there in far less than fourteen billion years though if the universe expanded faster than the speed of light at one time. In fact, that same light might have always been visible everywhere, because it was once jammed up against everything else in a space smaller than an electron. When space expanded, that light stayed visible like a string stretching behind a rolling ball of yarn. I’m really sorry if that shatters the simple-minded theories of evolutionists, but they need to learn to suck it up and be consistent with their science.

Anyway, don’t let anyone beat you over the head with this new discovery. The same article in The New Yorker that attempted to explain the vagaries of the new physics also had this to say in the end:

For some people, the possibility that the laws of physics might illuminate even the creation of our own universe, without the need for supernatural intervention or any demonstration of purpose, is truly terrifying.

Don’t patronize us. This recent finding proves no such thing. And to appropriate it for that purpose is disingenuous. We’re not terrified. You are apparently terrified that you might have to explain evolutionary theory in a young universe.

But science has come no closer to explaining how everything got here. All it has confirmed is that, at one time, there was nothing. And it has also confirmed that all the something we now see could have gotten here in no time at all. Which is pretty much exactly what God said happened.

116 responses

  1. You morons think that if there’s some knowledge gap in the big bang or evolution that must mean the Bible is true. That’s not how it works. Bring some evidence (beyond the Bible) to prove your point

    • The far right gets too confused by science. How did any of them pass high school? Maybe they “lied” on their exams.

      There are excellent videos on You Tube and cable science programs. I just bought “Fabric of the Cosmos” and next on the list is Morgan Freeman’s, “Through the Wormhole.”

      • They aren’t confused. They just reject science on the back of some 2,000 year old book written by anonymous bronze age goat hearders

        • Actually, That “2000 year old book” is as extinct as the dinosaurs. Every bible version existing today has been hand-copied by somebody in the course of history. That explains why there are several versions, but ofcouse also rises the question of authenticity.

          • That’s the irony. If God performed the miracle of putting his words in a book you would think he’d preform the miracle of preserving the book! We have no idea what the original Gospels even said!

          • You ever hear of the value of 2 or 3 witnesses? Many disciples died for their testimony the Jesus was God. Quite a witness story. But your avatar indicates talking to you is a waste of time. An honest scientific inquirer you appear not to be.

          • More circular reasoning. “we know the bible is the true word of god because it says so in the bible”.

          • But that is exactly the problem. Even if there were a god, he never wrote a book. The book, regardless whether it was written 4000 or 2000 or somewhere in between years, was written by humans who CLAIM they wrote god’s word. So, what you really believe in are the scriptures of some humans that were written in the same time period as the tales of the Greek and Roman Mythology. So, what makes this god any more real than the gods of the Olympus, that also “spoke” to their human counterparts and allegedly influenced their lives.

          • I understand why you are confused. You try to approach life from a faulty foundation, that’s why you can’t see things as they truly are.

            In response to you question, please read my reply to Bob about just a few of the unique characteristics of God’s Word.

          • The Hebrew rabbis did go through great lengths when copying the OT. The same cannot be said for those that copied the NT because NONE of the oldest copies we have are alike!

          • Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Textus Receptus and all the thousands of parchment and papyrus fragments all same the same things – the ones that don’t are reserved for Apocrypha.

            I really do wish you would study these things for yourself instead of regurgitating some drivel you’ve heard from unbelievers. Nothing is as life changing as self-education and enlightenment by the Holy Spirit.

            You should try it some time.

    • How about YOU bring some evidence besides your arrogant assertions. There is zero evidence propping up your mythology of Big Bang and untold millions of years of earth’s existence. That’s why you freak out whenever genuine science finds another piece to God’s puzzle in the universe.

      • There is plenty of evidence and it keeps growing, that is where you are confused. There is zero evidence to the existence of a god and it remains like that per omnia secula seculorem..

        • It is my opinion that they deem it false without ever reading it, actually doing a study, perhaps afraid to read it. There is so much wonderful information in there to give anybody the information they need about GOD, HIS SON and THEIR WORKS.Matthew describes the days that we are living and the days forward until the return of JESUS, GOD’S SON.

          • Matthew describes the “night of the living dead” in 27:51-53 in which zombies came out of the grave & “went into the holy city, and appeared unto many”!!!! Odd how an event like that didn’t even make it into the other gospels or the historic record. .

        • Evidence is a two-sided coin, Roger. Unfortunately for evolutionists their arrogance handicaps their ability to approach facts with an unbiased mind.
          BTW, anyone can use Babelfish. 🙂

          • I think that BOTH ‘sides’ approach the same evidence with differing prejudices. My prejudice follows the Word of God, whereas (because in their minds there is no God) evolutionists follow whatever ‘new’ science that is currently making the rounds. THAT kind of science is insincere and intellectually dishonest. When I see the fossil of a dinosaur (whether with or without human footprints near them) I think of the marvelous complexity of God’s creative power; when evolutionists see them they think “giant bird-reptile thing which came from soup.’

          • The ONLY people on the planet that believe creationism/intelligent design is science are Christians! Our Supreme Court has even ruled that its not science by religion. Science
            has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without any proof. THAT is the difference!

          • Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy
            Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the remains of the son of god.

      • When you say science has no evidence to back it’s claims that only shows you have no understanding of science or evidence

        • I understand science. What was science 30 years ago is not science today because all the facts known by people just like you at that time have been “proven” to be something else today…in 30 years all the facts you know today will have been shown to be something else and in the name of science people will swear it’s truth. Your truth is constantly changing. My truth hasn’t changed in 2,000 years and it constantly withstands every challenge the “smart” people like you attempt to throw at it.

          You believe in something 100% factual that will be substantially changed in 30 years by new facts because those old facts weren’t actually facts…and the new facts won’t be facts either but lots of people will be eager to believe them.

          2,000 years from now the Bible will still be standing right where it is today and was 2,000 years ago.

          I believe in something that is tested and challenged constantly and remains…

          You believe something that never stays the same and constantly contradicts itself but I’m the moron.

      • There is evidence. Have you ever done any reading on The Big Bang? No. Do you know how to use You Tube? No. Are you aware that thousands of scientists do not attribute The Big Bang Theory to an deity? No.

        • Are you aware the Big Bang theory would not be at all going against the Bible… Not at All. When you light gas to make light (As God did to the sun and other stars when he said let there be light), it going to have a loud bang noise… Knowing how God works does not remove God from the universe. It just means we as a people might be become a little bit smarter about the universe around us. Science has been hurt by people who think like Bob… they think it is rock solid and never wrong. When it fact science is always needing to correct itself from errors found later on by “newer” science – yes sometimes we finally do get it 100% correct and no changes come, but that usually after making many errors. The Bible has never been found with an error. Never has one error been found. And usually when an atheist of “higher level education” person comes along to try to disprove the Bible after a couple of years of research they end up converting to Christianity as they realize: They can not disprove it. The stories are solid. People who follow are genuine. Of course many other reasons. We are talking about thousand of “smart” people trying to disprove the Bible. None succeeded but many were converted over… This should make you think. In all science fields we are always updating information a facts as we were wrong or off a bit before.. Things we get right are more exact science: 1 + 1 = 2, water = H2O. However, when it comes to other things we are still messed up.

      • So when the Hubble and all the huge telescopes observe the Universe and we see all that exist out there, this is not evidence. The human soul has only evidence of its own existence and draws conclussions of the existence of G-d.
        To say there is ZERO evidence is to put yourself in a very deep hole it which you will never climb out of…

        • 3rd grade…that’s about right. You may have the mental acuity of an 8 year old, but maybe you’re not quite that mature.

          • The mountain of evidence that science has to support evolution is so overwhelming that only religious kooks deny it

    • You keep talking about all the GAPS in knowledge (which there are many) concerning evolutionary theory. What makes you so sure there’s an explanation? Faith, maybe? Faith in your religion of evolution is just that, faith. Facts, on the other hand, continue to show creation as a more meaningful, and appropriate, explanation for the universe.

      • The problem with your God if the gaps is that as science fills in the gaps your God becomes more & more distant. What creationism cannot understand is even if they could prove evolution wrong it still wouldn’t make creationism true. Try to count up the gaps in creationism

  2. When God light up the stars, giving us the light we know have, he’d be adding flame to gas…. As anyone that study science would have to agree, that would create one hell of a Big Bang. A statement I’ve repeatedly made and have state before on this site. The more we scientifically learn about our beginnings the more it matches the Bibles story. Just the closed minded hater like Bob, can not seem to understand… even when it is pointed out to them. Sorry Bob, just remember this, most of the top scientist on this planet believe in God. Some day you might learn the two work together. Science is just us learning how God makes things work.

    • There isn’t any more evidence supporting the Christian creation myth then there is 1,000 other creation myths. Only science brings evidence to back it’s claims

      • Yes, there is a ton of evidence to support many of the stories in the Bible, tons… Including the very real fact the Jesus walked on this planet and was Crusified under the Roman. The source is one the of greatest historian of that time frame in Rome. He was a Roman citizen, and recorded many events. Modern historians use his work for everything when covering that time period of Roman. I gave you his name on the other thread yesterday. The question is will you want to learn something or are you going to keep your blinders on and stay a small minded person?

        • There is not a single mention of Jesus by ANY person that was alive during the time jesus was supposed to have lived. NOT ONE!!!

          • LABobE, your error knows no bounds does it? ANY person, that includes all the apostles, followers, Roman government, etc. Not to mention, Flavius Josephus if you meant to say extra-Biblical writings. When you make such a broad exclusionary statement you might actually back it up with actual knowledge, rather than your desire to make these ‘stupid Christians’ look like fools. Look in the mirror.

          • Of course you are mistaken. You have not taken into account Josephus, Tacitus, Saul of Tarsus, Luke of Macedonia, Mara son of Sarapion, and the writers of letters which have been gathered together as the New Testament of the Christian Bible.
            These sources have been studied for hundreds of years, and are accepted as authentic, and reasonable proof of the historical Jesus. There is little doubt among scholars of antiquity as to the truth that Jesus of Nazareth was a historical person.

            Based on your lack of accepting such credible sources, you would not believe that my great-great-grandmother on my mother’s side existed: No one alive today has personal knowledge of her; there are no birth records since being born in the Czechoslovakia all such records as well as household goods and mementos were destroyed during and after the communist takeover; she wasn’t famous enough to have been written of by a bestselling author or to be included in a country’s preserved history; he only account of her existence is the fact that people she was related to passed down stories of her, including a couple of letters containing reference to her – but who can believe them since they had a vested interest in perpetrating the myth, right?; and my own existence is not proof enough either, since we could be completely mistaken about who I’m descended from.

            Don’t let your hatred of God blind you to the only one who can save you – Jesus of Nazareth, Son of God, Savior.

    • To suggest the top scientists believe in God is simply not true & those that do believe in a God. That God is nothing like the Christian god

      • Wow, the liberal processing plant has really destroyed your ability to think. Again the MAJORITY of scientist believe in God. You just talk to small mind (limited thinking range) people and believe that since you all think the same way we must be correct…. Sorry but your small pond view of the World is much different then the real Ocean size view of the World.

          • Incorrect. Yours is based on a small group of like thinking people. Genuine science can not and has not disproved any part of the Bible, period. Genuine and confirmed science on the creation of the Earth matches the Bible (just get the idea out of your head that God’s day is the same as our human day)… No, myth. However, if takes an open mind to see this…. and I know you have been taught by liberals which teach closed minded thinking. Christian know that God stated most will not see and understand his word and will fight to speak against it no matter what proof and teachings you bring them. You seem to be one of those types.

          • you believe that the earth was created in six literal days; women come from a man’s rib; a snake, a donkey, and a burning bush spoke human language; the entire world was flooded, covering the mountains to drown evil; all animal species, millions of them, rode on one boat; language variations stem from the tower of Babel; Moses had a magic wand; the Nile turned to blood; a stick turned into a snake; witches, wizards, and sorcerers really exist; food rained from the sky for 40 years; people were cured by the sight of a brass serpent; the sun stood still to help Joshua win a battle, and it went backward for King Hezekiah; men survived unaided in a fiery furnace; a detached hand floated in the air and wrote on a wall; men followed a star which directed them to a particular house; Jesus walked on water unaided; fish and bread magically multiplied to feed the hungry; water instantly turned into wine; mental illness is caused by demons; a “devil” with wings exists who causes evil; people were healed by stepping into a pool agitated by angels; disembodied voiced spoke from the sky; Jesus vanished and later materialized from thin air; people were healed by Peter’s shadow; angels broke people out of jail; & think there’s some kind of proof of this nonsense?

        • Religious people begin with the premise that they are right and that any evidence to the contrary must be faulty in some way. They do not seek truth, only confirmation of their own mythology

    • Please check your grammar and spelling. It’s hard to take someone seriously when they try to make a seemingly intelligent rebuttal when there are spelling and grammar mistakes everywhere. Thanks.

      • I’m sorry I do not have a prefect brain like you. It most be so awesome to go through life thinking everyone is prefect and just lazy, unlike your prefect self – then rub it in their face. I promise you one thing, I put more time into reviewing my post, checking the best I can for spelling and grammar then you ever will. Actually, probably more then most people on this page. However, as I have stated before on other post, I have a minor case of dyslexia, an no matter how many times I review and make corrections, I will NEVER be able to be perfect – my brain will just not see certain types of errors. This is a blog page not a final report so I’m not going to pay someone to do a final check on my work…. maybe you should step off your high horse and realize some people are just not gifted with perfection like you have been. I of course am not ashamed of my issues as I have great company. Many of the top thinkers in the world had the same issue as I do. It’s the small minded people that let people defects get in the way of the vision being expressed. So, again I will apologizes for not being good enough for you, but I am only a man.

        If you ever have a question about what I state please ask as I will not be offended… I understand sometimes my point is lost do to grammar. However, I can not do better then I am. Otherwise I would have studied law verse Economics and Fiance (numbers seem not to be an issue for me), just words.

  3. “Which is pretty much exactly what God said happened.” Not to me he didn’t! Besides, look around you. Is that what you see the product of an all knowing, almighty, and endlessly forgiving and loving being?
    Just yesterday, I saw a video of a crocodile tearing an antelope baby apart. Can you imagine the terror of that poor animal? Would you treat your pet like that? I wouldn’t and I’m not even a god. And would you destroy part of your creation by letting an asteroid collide with earth and wipe out most of what you supposedly created before? (that IS fact). I’d say that is pretty sick for an almighty.

    • You judge God based on human morals and rules. God is God, you are not. He makes the rules, you don’t. Trying to make Him a sadistic murderer if He isnt all kisses and butterflies isnt really proper reasoning. He has a bigger purpose for every action and course, whether we understand it or not. If you have kids, you five them shots as a baby. They feel pain, yet they dont know why. But we know it is for their own good. Same with God. We might not understand WHY there is suffering, but He does. If I didnt go through my divorce, I wouldn’t have met my current wife today (much better one In fact). Plus the Bible says the poor will always be with us, and there will be a final war (in Revelation). So, there will always be war, death, and suffering.

      • I thought you said the war in revelation was going to be the final one. So how can there always be war and death and suffering?

      • We don’t judge any of the thousand of different gods people have believed in. We judge the evidence that supports their existence. The one thing they all have in common is that’s there’s no evidence (other then a book) to support they exist. That being the case a logical person would concluded they don’t exist

        • That makes no sense in response to what I said. To us, it appears as you don’t want to believe because you want to be your own god. To have no reason or fear of punishment in death. And you have my pity, whether you consider it worthwhile or not.

          • What a silly thing to say – “you want to be your own god.” No one wants your pity. We want you to back off. We have a right to our own beliefs.

          • Just because you wont take the rope to keep you yourself from drowning, doesnt mean we will stop throwing it out to you.

          • Tell me then why you believe your religion & not one of a thousand others? I’ll tell you why, you were born into it. When you can understand why you reject all the other gods you will begin to understand why I reject yours

          • Good speculation, but no. Actually when I was younger, and even young adult, I really didn’t like going to church, even when being taken there by my parents without my decision. But, after my own judgement, research, and depictions, I found I was wrong and do follow God strong. And two religions can’t be the same. So, it doesn’t matter if there are millions of different faiths, only one can be right, and I choose this one. (And stay focused on me choosing, not “being forced to go to church” because I know how you love to call that child abuse. And technically, any form of teaching is brainwashing).

          • Your research? Tell me what other religions you researched before you came to the conclusion ALL the rest were fairytails except yours?

          • Scientology, Mormonism, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism. Shall I continue? Point is, I chose it, and sticking to it.

          • You’re different then most. Tell me then how did you realize all the supernatural BS in these other religions were myths but the super natural BS in your religion was historic fact?

          • I guess the best way to put it, it made the most sense to me personally. That and the overall ideology behind other religions, didn’t either make sense, or just seemed plain ridiculous. No other religions founder self-sacrificed themselves for the betterment of their followers (and God is Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, so, the same person really). To me, that makes me want to sacrifice my time, money, and talents for others. Can’t take it with me, might as well do as much good with what I got while I can.

          • You do realize that there are a number of “suffering saviours” that predate Jesus that did.

          • Prophets dying, sure. Martyrs, yea. But a God letting us kill Him for our benefit? Never done before.

          • The story of Jesus isn’t original. There are a number of suffering saviours with pretty much the same story that predate Jesus

          • you are doing a complete waste of time an energy arguing with “Boobie.” He likelyis the oldest “troll” on here he come and goes with a legion of different names. He is antichrist and disperses the JESUS CHRIST and truth. He never gets tired of writing his lies and declaring that they are “truth!.” If there happen to be any truth in what he says he has it so twisted, it is impossible to pass as anything but another lie.

          • This truth isn’t twisted. In spite of the fact the NT paints a picture of Jesus doing all sorts of supernatural things & was known by many. Not a single person alive when Jesus was supposed to have lived! NOT ONE!

      • Compassion is not a human rule, it is also one of the cornerstones of religion. And somebody who doesn’t play by his own rules isn’t to be trusted. But please elaborate on the “We might not understand WHY there is suffering, but He does”. How would you know? Did he tell you that? And your example with the kids: yes, I give them shots, but I don’t throw them to the wolves. The shots are eventually (at least potentially) beneficial to the kid and the kid will understand that when it grows up, but tell me were being torn apart by a crocodile is potentially beneficial to the baby antelope. I’ll keep judging him to my standards, which are not so different from those that he supposedly lays down for us.

        • Ill put it more simply. You dont understand Gods thinking or will, even I dont. And to question it is foolish. In other words, if He said, “Jump”, the correct response would be, “How high?” Call it what you will, but you are free to have your own opinion. You not being a Christian will never understand unless you truly accept and become one. As it states in the Bible

          • Other religions don’t have the ability to pinpoint predictions of future events, except the Bible has done (and will continue to do) just that. You can’t see it because of your hatred for God and your consistent refusal to acknowledge the truth. Here are just a few examples;

            The destruction of Jerusalem and the carrying away into captivity.
            The succession of earthly world powers after the Babylonian Kingdom.
            When Israel would return to their homeland after that captivity.
            The year of Messiah’s (Jesus) birth.
            The way Jesus would die.
            What kind of burial place He would have.
            The destruction of Jerusalem after the Resurrection of Christ.
            The re-gathering of Israel in modern times.
            The modern alignment of regions/nations during this present time.

            There is a LOT more, but what’s the point in going any further? You refuse to acknowledge what has already transpired, so any warning about upcoming events would be equally ignored. However, as some have said all along, if we keep sharing then maybe you will finally listen?
            I sincerely hope you do listen, because if you keep rejecting the truth you face a terrible, unimaginable future. THAT would truly be tragic.

          • I have read the book & it’s very clear. apologist always claim the bible doesn’t mean what it says, they are convinced it says what they mean.

          • Two problems with that, firstly, he never says or said anything to me or to anybody I know.
            Secondly, as to me becoming a Christian: I was baptized (of course without my consent, as it always is) and went through the torment of school at a Jesuit College. So, I’m quite well informed about it all and choose that it may be a nice fairy tale, but nothing more.
            I could add a third: I don’t see the merit of worshiping somebody/something, I don’t understand and there is no proof, even indication, that he/it even exists.

          • Baptism isn’t a forced event (and no where in the Bible does it say baptizing or “sprinkling” of babies counts). It is a choice. I wasn’t baptized until I was 28, but only because I chose it. My church won’t do baptisms unless they baptisee knows what they are doing and understands their commitment.

            It is your choice whether you want to believe or not. That is what free will is. God isn’t going to come down and converse with you. That isn’t how faith works. He speaks in many ways. But, if you have been confronted and taught the knowledge, and refuse to accept it, then you will have no one to blame but yourself come whenever your end is.

          • So, there’s no way I can properly understand the bible, because I’m unsaved and don’t have the discernment of the Holy Spirit. So apparently, with eternity in the balance, God has placed his instructions for living into a
            book that cannot be properly understood by anyone who actually needs the information to avoid Hell. NICE!!!

          • give me a copy of the OT & I could invent a person in a NT that fulfills the prophecy in the OT in about 15 minutes.

    • You got it straight. Every major event that has ever occurred, on earth, wars, storms of all sorts was foretold by GOD is HIS WORD. It amazes me how many thought to be smart people do not believe, cannot even understand what HIS WORD, is even saying. It gives all indications that HIS SON JESUS CHRIST will return soon, for those who believe HIS WORD and strive to live accordingly. Much of it is so vivid that if we print it, it will be deleted. The truth is the most unbelieved and hated thing in HIS universe today.

      Matthew 24 give us a lot of information about the future, for all who are interested.and care to read it.

    • Roger, God made Earth as a perfect state, and He gave Man authority to reign over this planet as he saw fit. Well, he saw fit to give that authority to Lucifer, and thus sin entered into the world (and all the horror along with it). Since God is not a liar or a thief, He will abide by the authority of Man until His Son Jesus ascends to the throne, but certain things have to play out before that happens.

      Since you probably have absolutely no idea what I’m talking about please visit my website. Who knows, you may learn some things!

      • there is an invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster, who created the entire universe “after drinking heavily.” The Monster’s intoxication is the cause for a flawed Earth. All “evidence” for evolution was planted by the Flying Spaghetti Monster, in an effort to test Pastafarians’ faith (a form of the Omphalos hypothesis). When scientific measurements, such as radiocarbon dating, are made, the Flying Spaghetti Monster “is there changing the results with His Noodly warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of pirates since the 1800s, pirates are “absolute divine beings” and the original Pastafarians (human pastafarians, penguins being the first living). Their image as “thieves and outcasts” is misinformation spread by Christian theologians in the Middle Ages and by Hare Krishnas. They were in fact “peace-loving explorers and spreaders of good will” who distributed candy to small children, and modern pirates are in no way similar to “the fun-loving buccaneers from history”

  4. Minkoff, you take far to much liberty with the word ‘proven’ and in doing so demonstrate your ignorance of science. Scientifically speaking, there is no such thing as proof – the proper word to use is demonstrate. If a fact is repeatedly demonstrated then it is accepted as repeatable, but someone who understands scientific philosophy would be reluctant to use the word proven.

  5. Arguing with an atheist just gives you heartburn. In spite of the correct reasoning taking place in the article above, the non-scientists who believe blindly in the big bang and deny God will continue to do so and never even look once at anything but their faith that something came from nothing. Arguing numbers of scientists who believe gets you nowhere, simply because these people spent years at a university does not mean they can see through time. All that ‘science’ is theory, and it comprises the belief system, requiring a whole lot of faith. Their self-satisfaction comes from name calling and the utter denial that there is any logic in the young earth theories. Their standard bearer, Carl Sagan, knows now, when it ‘s too late. Oh, did you know that if he had lived longer he might have accepted the truth? He was being evangelized by a friend, who wouldn’t give up for the sake of his friend. But Sagan ran out of time. Will you?

    • Religious people begin with the premise that they are right and that any evidence to the contrary must be faulty in some way. They do not seek truth, only confirmation of their own mythology. It is inherent in religion that it freezes the
      scientific understanding of its time into superstitious dogma. When it starts
      to unpick its dogma, as it was forced, eventually, about the sun revolving
      round the earth, the whole edifice starts to crumble

        • You confuse science with religion. The problem of religious belief is that, once you have accepted a set of propositions unsupported by logic, evidence or rational analysis, you are then capable of believing anything without submitting it to rational consideration add to that A belief which leaves no place for doubt is not a belief; it is a superstition

      • Sorry LA, may I say you have composed a non sequitur? Hmm, wow, you know it would seem that the concept of all matter in the universe existing in an area the size of an atom, I saw electron in one article, would seem to be superstitious dogma in truth. The superstition is that such masses of matter could be compressed into a single point. Calculations indicate that it might fit, but no one existed (according to your calendar) for billions of years, so where’s the proof of that theory? There is none, except that which the atheistic community wishes to shove down the throats of the young, so that their faith will have new standard bearers, ones who can’t think for themselves. Oh, and don’t tell me how my thinking is defective and doesn’t conform to your idea of what the truth is, who exactly are you to make such an egotistical statement? I use more science in one day than you do in a year, I’m not some easily silenced kid. But I also recognize that faith is just that, and no matter how logical an argument I can present to you, your mind is made up and no matter the consequence you will likely die in your rejection of the truth, sadly.

  6. I think you’re making a few logical errors here. The “inflationary epoch” where the most rapid expansion occurred (and what is under discussion in these gravity wave findings) happened within seconds of the big bang; in fact, it occurred before the big bang singularity (the point which we cannot see past). There were no stars at all in that time frame. No matter at all. In other words, the 13+ billion year old light we see from stars happened quite a while after the “great stretching” had settled down and what appears to be a more uniform rate of expansion had set in. In fact, my understanding is that the universe is expanding faster now than it was at any time other than that “inflationary epoch.”

    And yes, some funky non-Newtonian stuff happens here. I think that’s why a lot of scientists still disagree about the age of the universe. But I don’t see how finding evidence left over from a quick universal expansion at some time before we can even observe offers support for a younger universe. Nor do I see why it should matter to Christians at all. However it happened, it happened. I think it’s fair to treat Moses’ creation account as a parable and move on. Just my 2 cents.

Leave a Reply