The science world talks about the Big Bang theory.  It’s big to them.  That world says that this event occurred about 14 billion years ago.  Not quite 14 billion.  I understand that timeline to grate on believers, a finger-nails on chalkboard effect that makes them deny it loud and vehemently.  And then scientists add that ‘life began 600 million years ago’ and ‘humans one million years.’  The Bible contradicts all this.  It might gnaw at you.  I understand.  For me now, when someone mentions Big Bang, it doesn’t bother me so much.

When I hear Big Bang now, I think of a couple of different ideas, true ones.  To start, if I hear Big Bang, I exchange it in my head for creation.  Big Bang equals creation.  That’s not what the scientists think.  It’s what I think.  I’m also not saying that God used a Big Bang or something like that.  Stay with me.

The Big Bang Hypothesis is science that says that the universe had a beginning.  What’s considered to be the best science right now, the best explanation of cosmology, the Big Bang Hypothesis or Theory, admits that the material universe does not go back interminably.  There must have been a beginning, had to be.  The scientific proof behind the Big Bang hypothesis says that everything began with a Big Bang.

Okay.  The universe had to begin.  That is what happened.  When the scientists look at the evidence, they see the movement of everything outward, starting with what they call a singularity and then a very rapid expansion, which means it all came from some beginning point.  It had to.  There are more technicalities to that explanation, which complement it, but that’s the gist of it.

If you then open your Bible to Genesis 1, you see that the essence of a Big Bang did occur at the beginning.  Scientists vary on calling the singularity, the beginning, either an expansion or an explosion.  Whatever they want to call it, it was an explosion.  Some call it one, saying that “an extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward.”  The hypothesis or theory says that there was cosmic inflation and the hot universe expanded exponentially, but decreased in density and cooled in temperature, which then slowed everything down.

The Big Bang says the explosion sent matter on an outward trajectory.  Genesis 1 says that all matter, “earth,” was also altogether in one mass without form and void, including waters, until the addition of energy, described as the Spirit of God moving.  The Hebrew word “moved” in Genesis 1:2 has the understanding of “vibrated.”  Energy waves start with vibration.  The energy is God or the power His omnipotence.

The Big Bang is a hypothesis based on the evidence.  It must have been an explosion.  But how and why did the explosion take place?  Where did the energy come from?  The hypothesis doesn’t provide the answers.  It’s got other problems too, because there is too much organization, precision, and fine tuning for an explosion as an explanation, even if they want to call it a very hot, rapid expansion.  It’s why they won’t use the word explosion.  Even though it was first called a big bang, now many say there was no bang, just a vast, rapid expansion of extremely condensed material.  The technical definition of explosion still though is “a violent expansion in which energy is transmitted outward as a shock wave,” so same thing.

To fit or correspond to the known universe, the beginning must have been from great intelligence, power, immensity, beauty, love, and wisdom, which fits a description only that goes along with the God of the Bible.  The Big Bang Theory offers some kind of power, that is unexplained, some kind of cosmic accident.  It doesn’t tell us where the power or even the matter that exploded came from.  Physicists and astronomers look at the results and with a naturalist presupposition, they hypothesize the Big Bang.  It isn’t science.

If you have a naturalistic universe, which was caused by another natural thing, you haven’t explained the origin.  You’ve got to have an explanation for the natural thing that originated the natural thing, which doesn’t provide the intelligence, power, and other factors necessary for such an origin.  The major questions remain unanswered.  A natural thing originating another natural thing by accident is philosophical.  It isn’t scientific.  It doesn’t explain such an outcome either cosmologically or biologically.

The scientist asks about time, how long the original material that exploded took to get where it is now.  The first cause must be supernatural and uncaused, so time isn’t an issue.  That first cause is all powerful.  Time doesn’t have to be a consideration.  I wrote recently about the age of the fish and bread with which Jesus fed to the 5,000.  There was no process.  The fish and bread appeared instantly.  The time aspect is another attempt to divert to a naturalistic explanation.  It’s philosophical, not scientific.

The Big Bang didn’t happen, but when someone talks about it, you at least understand the theory based on the information relied upon.  It’s getting back to a beginning.  This isn’t good enough, but it is scientists dealing with the truth of a beginning.  That’s at least a starting point.  That’s a truth that we can work with, when we want to talk about God to the world.