Theory One: Before the creation of the universe there existed, and still exists, a supernatural being (i.e. a being existing outside the physical universe). This being is one of unlimited, or at least immeasurable, power and influence over the universe and is responsible for the creation of matter, energy and physical law. As a "spiritual" entity, He resides outside the physical universe (time and space) and is thus able to view the entirety of both and able to dramatically effect them.
Theory Two: The entire, physical universe came into existence, without outside influence, at a particular point of time, when an incredibly dense mass of matter exploded, forming all of the stars, galaxies and planets we witness today.
Now, which one of these two theories could be proven to violate the laws of physics? Well, let's see (feel free to try this at home):
The First Law of Thermodynamics: The Conservation of Matter and Energy: "Energy can neither be created or destroyed". Isaac Asimov once explained the law this way, "Energy can be transferred from one place to another, or transformed from one form or another, but it can be neither created nor destroyed." Bear in mind here that both energy and matter are one and the same, merely different forms of matter/energy. This is why uranium and plutonium can be transformed via a nuclear device into heat and light energy. Now consider, how easy is it to transform light and heat back into matter? Pretty hard. In fact it cannot be done. This brings us to the another Law.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics: The Law of Entropy: "All systems and elements tend to disintegrate to a lower order of available energy or organization." For example, if you were to hook a battery and a generator together, with the battery powering the generator and the generator recharging the battery, how long would this system continue to function? Well, it would depend on the quality of the components but everyone would agree that it would eventual cease to function. Why? Because, no matter how perfectly the individual components functioned or how good the connections between them were, energy would be lost. There is no "perpetual motion machine". It would violate the laws of physics.
So, applying these laws to the universe we see a few things clearly:
1) The universe could not have existed forever, it would have long since "burned up".
2) It must have been created/initialized at some point in the past.
3) It will one day cease to function.
Fine, great, both theories agree on these basic points, right?
Well, no. You see the second theory still states that the universe exploded into being from an original mass of matter. According to the first Law of Thermodynamics this mass must have contained enough matter to supply all the existing matter in the present universe and all the available energy in the universe and all the unavailable energy (lost via the law of entropy) as well as all the "missing matter" that has puzzled scientists for so long not to mention all the unseen, theoretical black holes.
In other words, the original source of matter would have near-infinitely too massive to ever "explode". It would have immediately collapsed into a horrific black hole and the universe would never have come to exist as we know it. So how do scientists explain this? Simple. They say that the laws of physics, at that particular fraction of a second known as the "Big Bang", did not apply. And why did the laws of physics not apply? Who knows? But they must not have. And how do we know this to be true? Because the universe exists as it would not had the laws applied at the moment of the Big Bang.
In other words, in rationalizing this "Big Bang" theory, scientists cheated. The universe came into being this way, they say, because it must have. The only other explanation is that it was created and we all know that theory is just ridiculous.
Yep, this is what they are teaching your kids in school. Brilliant.
To quote the bible: "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." Psalm 14:1
Now, I admit that the mechanics of the Big Bang theory are not represented here in complete detail. The fact is that this theory, like most "Godless" theories, is so complicated, so convoluted and require such a profoundly bizarre method of reasoning to understand that it would impossible to accurately portray here without offering a volume of information that would rival the Encyclopedia Brittanica. You can check out many texts in your local libary if you want to understand the theory better (click here for a somewhat more detailed examination), but the meat and bones of the matter is that this theory demands two things to be accepted, both of which fly in the face of modern scientific knowledge and simple common sense:
1) The universe sprang into being out of nothing, from nowhere.
2) This original matter, in defiance of physical law, "exploded" outward with such force that it is still expanding today.
NEXT SECTION