Do creationists discount the Big Bang theory as well as evolution?

A *thinking* Creationist would treat them as separate issues.

Evolution hits closer to home to the *fundamental* concept they reject ... namely that humans are the result of slow modification of animals, rather than a *special*, unique act of creation.

The Big Bang theory, on the other hand would seem to be not just compatible with Creationism, but scientifically *supportive* of Creationism. Namely, the Big Bang essentially just says that (a) the universe is not infinitely old but has a finite lifespan; and (b) the universe is the result of a *sudden* moment of creation (rather than a gradual emergence, like evolution is). So the Big Bang ... if you really *think* about it ... sounds an awful lot like a scientific depiction of sudden, divine Creation!

But the fact that Creationists do NOT treat evolution and the Big Bang separately is evidence that the phrase "thinking Creationist" is an oxymoron. Apparently, 'thinking' and 'Creationism' don't go together.

In other words, Creationism is not some deep theological objection to these theories as rejections of God (because they're not) ... it is a knee-jerk objection to a anything that contradicts the *literal* word of the Bible. The Big Bang is not rejected because it depicts a sudden origin of the universe (as that is exactly what Creation *is*) but over the mere matter of *TIMING* ... the Bible says (according to a *literal* reading) that the universe is a whopping 6,000 years old ... so the 14 billion years computed by the Big Bang theory is enough reason to reject it!

There is a lesson to be learned here about their rejection of evolution. ... That rejection is not based on *theological* grounds, but on *Biblical* grounds ... and Creationists fail to realize that these are NOT THE SAME THING. There is nothing *fundamental* about evolution that contradicts the existence of God. God can surely create species through the indirect mechanism of *evolution*, as God can create individuals through the indirect mechanism of *sexual reproduction*. But that is "not the way the Bible says."

This is my beef with Creationists. Their rejection of science is not about *God* (theism) ... it's about the *Bible* (scripture). Take the Bible out of the equation (or more precisely, a specific narrow *interpretation* of the Bible) ... and there is nothing in science that contradicts faith in God! Nothing! Science and religion are no longer "enemies" ... they are two completely harmonious approaches to Truth.

Christianity ... and in fact the *world* ... would be so much nicer without the kind of knee-jerk, non-thinking excuse for "faith" that produces such things as Creationism!

And that is why the majority of Christians ... who are NOT Biblical literalists, should treat Creationism as not only an embarrassment, but contrary to the very objectives of Christian faith. (See the Clergy Letter Project ... a letter signed by almost 12,000 Christian clergy members in support of this point, and a harmonious relationship between science and faith: http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/Christian_Cler... ).

Creationism creates conflict, where none is necessary.

I think of it as the 2-God theory. Some people need a god that's responsible for every single event in their lives. He gives neat, easy explanations that warrant, or invite, no scrutiny, e.g., "That the way I did it." Most importantly, he has a manual where you can look up how everything works and happens. That God's manual was written by primitive desert dwelling scribes makes it all the more "real" for them. This I call the followers of the little god. Others cannot reconcile the vastness and complexity of the universe without some guiding hand or principle. They generally laugh at the idea that God would violate the science arising out of one of His greatest creations - human intellect. And of course they cannot take the aforementioned scribbling of the camel guys as literal scientific truth. They have no problem with evolution, or with any other branch of science - indeed some of these believers are great contributors to the various theories. These I call the followers of the great god. I am a non-believer. But I've never had a problem with the believers of the great god - not even on things theological. And they see no controversy at all. Quite the contrary, they see the greatness of their god reflected in those theories and negated by the literalists.

Most do.

Young Earth creationists (the more common variety) believe that the earth was formed 6000 years ago, so a Big Bang occurring 13 billion years ago is of course out of the question for them. Some creationists accept that the earth is billions of years old, and among this group the Big Bang theory is sometimes but not always linked to evolution.

True creationism doesn't believe in the big bang or evolution. The theory simply means that a greater being created everything as it is right now. Intelligent design allows for all the science and just adds a footnote 'but God made it happen.' Intelligent design is a creationist theory, but different than true creationism.

Some theories also differentiate between micro and macro evolution.

err.... 'in the beginning was the Word' is new testament, not the beginning of Genesis.

Young earth creationists -- the scientific based facts against young earth is simply overwhelming.

Intelligent design -- an attempt by young earth creationists to keep their "story" book creation alive. They couldn't argue the facts so they decided to incorporate their creation story in with the facts. Either way, creation stories fall apart upon careful analysis. For example, intelligent design says nothing about why anyone should think that there was just one designer, why not many designers, maybe each designing different aspects of reality at different times. Creationists will not address that question for obvious reasons.

The big bang theory and evolutions -- everything that exists in the universe today has its roots in the minuscule undulations in the singularity at the time of the big bang origin of this universe. The phase-transitions and the patterns found in energy, matter, entropy, gravity, and time can explain all of reality. Take biology and the scientific fact of evolution, because of the nature of quantum mechanics such as the physics of entanglement and of something called Heisenberg uncertanity principle, life, and the evolution of that life was inevitable. Take evolution for example, at the quantum level, energy in the form of virtual particles, or constantly popping in and out of the vacuum, matter annihilating with anti-matter creating new energy and different virtual particles, some not virtual, of a different nature and form. It is this process when scalled up to the level of our classical realm which may be the first seeds of life and the first seeds of evolution following that life.

What was it that Einstein said about the universe: that, "what was completely incomprehendible is that the universe is comprehendible." or something to that effect.

See: Cosmology: The History and Nature of Our Universe

http://www.teach12.com/ttcx/coursedesclong2.aspx?c...

I highly recommend these quality DVD lecture courses by the Teaching Company to anyone whose interested in what science knows about the universe and how they know it.

I am a creationist and I do not discount the big bang. The big bang does not conflict with the Bible. God said "Let there be light" and 'big bang' there was light. Science confirms the existence of God or an Intelligent Designer.

Yes. Creationist base their opinion on Christian scripture. There is no Big Bang in Genesis.

Edit: A little point of clarity about Homo sapiens. No person is born Christian certainly not born Christian Creationist. You have to learn to be a Christian and you have to learn Creationist. You see, it is a form of religion, not science.

Yes.

Creationists believe that God created the world in 6 days, just thousands of years ago. This is completely contradictory to the idea of the Big Bang.

There are many reasons not to believe in the Big Bang - even many evolutionists have been pointing out its many flaws for some years.

Ideas such as inflation, dark energy, dark matter, have been invented to try and prop it up. But the writing is on the wall - BB simply does not explain the evidence.

Trouble is, there is not an alternative - for evolutionists - who will believe in literally anything (including dark matter for which there is no observational evidence), rather than acknowledge that God created the universe.

Well of course. If they believe that God created the world in seven days, then obviously the Big Bang theory had nothing to do with it.

some of them, some believe God created the world and in doing this He made the big bang , but others believe that God created the world and ther e wasn't a big bang at all. It doesn't specify in the bible.

My sister and I are both Christian creationalists, she belives the first option, i believe the second. I guess I don't believe because i don't think i should shape my beliefs to fit in with a theory someone has made up.