Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic: The Big Bang Heresy  (Read 682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cassini

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3799
  • Reputation: +2837/-273
  • Gender: Male
The Big Bang Heresy
« on: May 24, 2025, 10:44:22 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • By 1879, Robert Ingersoll, nicknamed the great Agnostic, could write the following after churchmen conceded to heluiocentrism and the evolution of its solar system from 1741.

    ‘The scientific Christians now admit that the bible is not inspired in its astronomy, geology, botany, zoology, or in any science. In other words, they admit that on these subjects, the bible cannot be depended upon… If the people of Europe had known as much of astronomy and geology when the Bible was introduced among them, as they do now, there never could have been one believer in the doctrine of inspiration. If the writers of the various parts of the Bible had known as much about the sciences as now known by every intelligent man, the Bible never could have been written. It was produced in ignorance and has been believed and defended by its author. It has lost power in the proportion that man has gained knowledge. A few years ago, this Bible was appealed to in the settlement of all scientific questions [of origins]; but now, even the clergy confess that in such matters, it has ceased to speak with the voice of authority. For the establishment of facts, the word of man is now considered far better than the word of God. In the world of science, Jehovah was superseded by Copernicus, Galileo [Lyell, Kant, Descartes, Darwin and Fr Lemaître’s Big Bang creation]. All that, God told Moses, admitting the entire account to be true, is dust and ashes compared to their scientific discoveries. In matters of fact, the Bible has ceased to be regarded as a standard. Science has succeeded in breaking the chains of theology. Some years ago, Science attempted to show that it was not inconsistent with Scripture. Now, Religion is endeavouring to prove that the Bible is not inconsistent with science. The standard has been changed.’--- Robert G. Ingersoll: Some Mistakes of Moses, 1879.


    Get it, first churchmen changed sunrise in the Bible to a fixed sun, then churchmen began to adjust the meaning of the Bible according to 'advances in science.'

    The following year, in 1880 and 1887 two tests produced evidence for geocentrism. Nevertheless,in 1820, having changed the meaning from the geocentrism defined as the true meaning of Scripture in 1616 , churchmen had to stick with the heresy they had endorsed rather than admit their terrible error of 1820. And that is how modernism progressed in the Catholic Church

    In 1922, the Russian Alexander Friedmann (1888-1925) ‘made the simplifying assumption that the universe had to be uniformly filled with a thin soup of [dark] matter.’ He ‘found a mistake in Albert Einstein’s 1917 cosmology and established that general relativity predicted the universe is unstable and the slightest perturbation would cause it to expand or contract.’ Immediately others wanted in on the new cosmology, especially the Jesuit Monsignor Abbé Georges Lemaître (1894-1966) who ‘was the first to use Friedmann-type solutions to formulate a ‘scientific’ model for a possible expansion of what he called the Primordial Atom or Cosmic Egg.’ All that was needed now was for someone to come up with some evidence for Fr Lemaître’s idea of a ‘miraculous’ natural expanding cosmic-atom. That occurred when the American astronomer Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) in 1929, using a newly built 100-inch telescope, viewed faraway galaxies for the first time. Examining the spectral-light emitted by these stars he found a lengthening of the red end with ‘nearly all of them,’ claiming the further away the more they had expanded. On this basis, Hubble held that the stars and galaxies were flying outwards in every direction at enormous speed as seen from Earth, which, if extrapolated - put into reverse - suggested an initial beginning from a central point. In 1931 Fr Lemaître presented his ‘scientific’ paper known as the Big Bang. But this presented a problem for them. If all the stars as seen from Earth had red shifts interpreted as moving away from Earth, then the Earth had to be at the centre of the universe. But this was a conclusion they didn’t want, so another ad hoc had to be invented. If, as Einstein proposed, all cosmic bodies existed on the surface of an expanding balloon car-tube type universe, then Hubble’s theory need not point to the Earth at its centre.


    Pope Pius XII’s Big Bang
    The courtship between Catholic faith and scientism reached a further low point on November 22, 1951 when Pope Pius XII once again addressed the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. The title of the Pope’s address was ‘The Proofs for the Existence of God in the Light of Modern Natural Science.’ With the immediate creation of all in their whole substance by God, and St Thomas’s teaching that the creative act of God cannot be demonstrated by unaided reason now redundant, Pius XII tries to make the Big Bang a new creation doctrine in as holy a language like found the Scriptures, a modernist Genesis.


    ‘44. It is undeniable that when a mind enlightened and enriched with modern scientific knowledge weighs this problem calmly, it feels drawn to break through the circle of completely independent or autochthonous matter, whether uncreated or self-created, and to ascend to a creating Spirit. With the same clear and critical look with which it examines and passes judgment on facts, it perceives and recognizes the work of creative omnipotence, whose power, set in motion by the mighty “Fiat” pronounced billions of years ago by the Creating Spirit, spread out over the universe, calling into existence with a gesture of generous love matter bursting with energy. In fact, it would seem that present-day science, with one sweeping step back across millions of centuries, has succeeded in bearing witness to that primordial “Fiat lux” uttered at the moment when, along with matter, there burst forth from nothing a sea of light and radiation, while the particles of chemical elements split and formed into millions of galaxies.’ On the other hand, how different and much more faithful a reflection of limitless visions is the language of an outstanding modern scientist, Sir Edmund Whittaker (1873-1956), member of the Pontifical Academy of Science, when he speaks of the above-mentioned inquiries into the age of the world: “These different calculations point to the conclusion that there was a time, some nine or ten billion years ago, prior to which the cosmos, if it existed, existed in a form totally different from anything we know, and this form constitutes the very last limit of science. We refer to it not improperly as creation. It provides a unifying background, suggested by geological evidence, for that explanation of the world according to which every organism existing on the Earth had a beginning in time. Were this conclusion to be confirmed by future research, it might well be considered as the most outstanding discovery of our times, since it represents a fundamental change in the scientific conception of the universe, similar to the one brought about four centuries ago by Copernicus.” It has, besides, followed the course and the direction of cosmic developments, and, just as it was able to get a glimpse of the term toward which these developments were inexorably leading, so also has it pointed to their beginning in time some five billion years ago. Thus, with that concreteness which is characteristic of physical proofs, it has confirmed the contingency of the universe and also the well-founded deduction as to the epoch when the cosmos came forth from the hands of the Creator.’--- Pope Pius XII, 1951.

    Yes, admits Pope Pius XII, the changes all began with Copernicus. Well, not really, had the pope studied Church history as well as their Big Bang evolution of the world he would have found in the secret archives records of these same heresies being condemned in the early centuries of the Catholic Church and at Bruno's trial, just as Professor A. A. Martinez found and recorded in his book Pythagoras or Christ. But there are other philosophical and theological consequences to placing the creative act of a Triune God at the mercy of science’s Big Bang.

    A philosopher replies: ‘Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that we can refer “not improperly” to the initial singularity [the Big Bang] as an act of creation. What conclusions can we draw from it? That a Creator exists? Suppose still, for the sake of argument, that this, too, is conceded. The problem now is twofold. Is this creator theologically relevant? Can this creator serve the purpose of faith? My answer to the first question is decidedly negative. A creator proved by cosmology is a cosmological agent that has none of the properties a believer attributes to [the Triune] God. Even supposing one can consistently say the cosmological creator is beyond space and time, this creature cannot be understood as a person or as the Word made flesh or as the Son of God come down to the world in order to save mankind. Pascal rightly referred to this latter Creator as the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” not of philosophers and scientists. To believe that cosmology proves the existence of a creator and then to attribute to this creator the properties of the Creation as a person is to make an illegitimate inference, to commit a category fallacy. My answer to the second question is also negative. Suppose we can grant what my answer to the first question intends to deny. That is, suppose we can understand the God of cosmologists as the God of theologians and believers. Such a God cannot (and should not) serve the purpose of faith, because, being a God proved by cosmology he should be at the mercy of cosmology. Like any other scientific discipline that, to use Pope John Paul II’s words, proceeds with “methodological seriousness,” cosmology is always revisable. It might then happen that a creator proved on the basis of a theory will be refuted when that theory is refuted.  Can the God of believers be exposed to the risk of such an inconsistent enterprise as science?’--- Marcello Pera. 

    So, was there, is there, a cosmology to refute Pope Pius XII’s Big Bang theory as proof for a Big Bang God? Well, back in 1543, Copernicus had written the following in his most famous book On the Revolutions, that if the geocentric stars are revolving at great speed around the Earth as Scripture reveals, then wouldn’t they fly outwards like children on a rotating carnival swing-ride‘

    But why didn’t Ptolemy feel anxiety about the [geocentric] world instead; whose movements must necessarily be of greater velocity, the greater the heavens are than the Earth? Or have the heavens become so immense, because a vehement motion has pulled them away from the centre, and because the heavens would fall if they came to rest anywhere else.’-- On the Revolutions, Book 1, par 8.?


    So, it seems Copernicus had long stated an expansion of stars would result if the universe was geocentric, thus eliminating the Big Bang theory as proving God’s creative act as Marcello Pera predicted above.
    Logged

    Offline Incredulous

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 9296
    • Reputation: +9115/-872
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #1 on: May 24, 2025, 11:22:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Pope Pius XII, in his much practiced posture.


    He unlocked many Church windows.
    Logged
    "Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it underfoot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days Our Lord Jesus Christ will send them not a true Pastor but a destroyer."  St. Francis of Assisi

    Offline IndultCat

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 144
    • Reputation: +107/-88
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #2 on: May 24, 2025, 02:59:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I know that the scientific "Big Bang Theory" was invented by a French-Jesuit priest named Georges LeMeitre (wrong spelling, probably) and, because of that, many or most Catholics believe that, therefore, it's perfectly fine for Catholics to accept this theory. 

    I don't think the Church ever formally condemned LeMeitre or his theory. So I don't see a problem with accepting it, personally.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12097
    • Reputation: +7622/-2302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #3 on: May 24, 2025, 03:01:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: IndultCat on May 24, 2025, 02:59:09 PM
    I know that the scientific "Big Bang Theory" was invented by a French-Jesuit priest named Georges LeMeitre (wrong spelling, probably) and, because of that, many or most Catholics believe that, therefore, it's perfectly fine for Catholics to accept this theory.

    I don't think the Church ever formally condemned LeMeitre or his theory. So I don't see a problem with accepting it, personally.
    :laugh1::facepalm:  Where in Scripture is the Big Bang?  I guess I missed that class in Bible study.  
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12097
    • Reputation: +7622/-2302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #4 on: May 24, 2025, 03:02:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Incredulous on May 24, 2025, 11:22:30 AM
    Pope Pius XII, in his much practiced posture.


    He unlocked many Church windows.
    Never seen that pose.  Very bizarre.   As more and more info comes out, Pius XII seems less and less likely to have been orthodox.  Seems to be a “Ronald Regan” type of pope.  The first neocon. 
    Logged

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2202
    • Reputation: +1121/-229
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #5 on: May 24, 2025, 05:19:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 03:01:42 PM
    :laugh1::facepalm:  Where in Scripture is the Big Bang?  I guess I missed that class in Bible study. 
    Why my fellow goy it's in the Kabbalah, haven't you read it yet?
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12097
    • Reputation: +7622/-2302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #6 on: May 24, 2025, 05:52:19 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: IndultCat on May 24, 2025, 02:59:09 PM
    I don't think the Church ever formally condemned LeMeitre or his theory. So I don't see a problem with accepting it, personally.
    The Church has never "formally condemned" every, single error in history.  There's simply not time to do so (nor is there a reason).  Catholics aren't allowed to believe in something simply because "I've never been told I can't".  This it's-not-condemned-therefore-it's-allowed idea is itself a heresy.

    95% of the errors out there today (and there are millions of them) are already condemned, most of them indirectly.

    If an error contradicts a dogma of the Faith, it is 'ipso facto' condemned.  Because the dogma is truth and anything which contradicts the dogma is indirectly condemned.

    Which is why it's so important for Catholics to KNOW THEIR FAITH.  The more you know, the more you will recognize errors.  If you fail in your duty (and it is a duty) to know your faith, then any errors you fall for are YOUR FAULT, by reason of indifference, laziness, etc.

    Popes (and the Church Fathers, and saints) have repeatedly taught that Scripture is to be understood LITERALLY, unless the Church expressly tells us otherwise.  Ergo, probably 75% of the Bible is to be read LITERALLY.

    Genesis is to be ready LITERALLY, especially in regards to God's creation.  The only area where the church has allowed "figurative" language is in the understanding of a "day", wherein saints have said it *might not* be 24 hours but a longer period (i.e. weeks).  However....they have all said that to extend this day into "years" is contrary to Scripture's meaning and is an error.

    Thus, the Big Bang is erroneous.
    Logged

    Offline hgodwinson

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 148
    • Reputation: +64/-14
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #7 on: May 24, 2025, 06:00:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 05:52:19 PM
    The Church has never "formally condemned" every, single error in history.  There's simply not time to do so (nor is there a reason).  Catholics aren't allowed to believe in something simply because "I've never been told I can't".  This it's-not-condemned-therefore-it's-allowed idea is itself a heresy.

    95% of the errors out there today (and there are millions of them) are already condemned, most of them indirectly.

    If an error contradicts a dogma of the Faith, it is 'ipso facto' condemned.  Because the dogma is truth and anything which contradicts the dogma is indirectly condemned.

    Which is why it's so important for Catholics to KNOW THEIR FAITH.  The more you know, the more you will recognize errors.  If you fail in your duty (and it is a duty) to know your faith, then any errors you fall for are YOUR FAULT, by reason of indifference, laziness, etc.

    Popes (and the Church Fathers, and saints) have repeatedly taught that Scripture is to be understood LITERALLY, unless the Church expressly tells us otherwise.  Ergo, probably 75% of the Bible is to be read LITERALLY.

    Genesis is to be ready LITERALLY, especially in regards to God's creation.  The only area where the church has allowed "figurative" language is in the understanding of a "day", wherein saints have said it *might not* be 24 hours but a longer period (i.e. weeks).  However....they have all said that to extend this day into "years" is contrary to Scripture's meaning and is an error.

    Thus, the Big Bang is erroneous.
    I need to tell myself this every day.
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2592
    • Reputation: +1490/-841
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #8 on: May 24, 2025, 06:04:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 03:01:42 PM
    :laugh1::facepalm:  Where in Scripture is the Big Bang?  I guess I missed that class in Bible study. 
    You don't think Genesis Chapter 1
     
    Quote
     3 And God said: Be light made. And light was made.

    I can see how that might lead people down this Big Bang idea? :cowboy:
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12097
    • Reputation: +7622/-2302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #9 on: May 24, 2025, 06:07:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on May 24, 2025, 06:04:06 PM
    You don't think Genesis Chapter 1
     
    I can see how that might lead people down this Big Bang idea? :cowboy:
    You dance around heretical views like a child dances around a firework, not knowing the dangers.  You have the maturity of a 12 year old.  
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2592
    • Reputation: +1490/-841
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #10 on: May 24, 2025, 06:09:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 06:07:15 PM
    You dance around heretical views like a child dances around a firework, not knowing the dangers.  You have the maturity of a 12 year old. 
    I did say some people MIGHT take that passage in the bible to mean Big Bang.  I did not say that was what I believe.
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12097
    • Reputation: +7622/-2302
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #11 on: May 24, 2025, 06:16:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Gray2023 on May 24, 2025, 06:09:42 PM
    How do you imagine what happened when God said be light made and then there was light?
    It doesn't matter what I think.  The 'big bang' isn't even involved with light. :facepalm:   It's involved with the creation of MATTER.  And God didn't create matter on the 1st day, when He created light.  :facepalm:

    You defend these scientific heresies and you don't even understand them.  :facepalm:  If you think your attitude towards the Faith and Scripture is acceptable as a Catholic, you are woefully mistaken.  I pray you realize the depths of your errors.  You are a material heretic, no question about it.  Shame on you.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46524
    • Reputation: +27408/-5061
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #12 on: May 24, 2025, 06:44:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 06:07:15 PM
    You dance around heretical views like a child dances around a firework, not knowing the dangers.  You have the maturity of a 12 year old. 

    She reminds me of JayneK that way.
    Logged

    Offline Gray2023

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2592
    • Reputation: +1490/-841
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #13 on: May 24, 2025, 07:45:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Lighten up!  I was just pointing at the passage in the bible to be funny (I guess when men are really talking about theories, there is no room for humor.)  I will try to remember that next time. :cowboy:
    Logged
    1 Corinthians: Chapter 13 "4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil;"

    Offline AnthonyPadua

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2202
    • Reputation: +1121/-229
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Big Bang Heresy
    « Reply #14 on: May 24, 2025, 07:53:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on May 24, 2025, 06:16:19 PM
    It doesn't matter what I think.  The 'big bang' isn't even involved with light. :facepalm:  It's involved with the creation of MATTER.  And God didn't create matter on the 1st day, when He created light.  :facepalm:

    You defend these scientific heresies and you don't even understand them.  :facepalm:  If you think your attitude towards the Faith and Scripture is acceptable as a Catholic, you are woefully mistaken.  I pray you realize the depths of your errors.  You are a material heretic, no question about it.  Shame on you.
    Light also isn't limited to visible light, there's so much in this first day we don't really understand. Then there is also the interpretation on it regarding angels.

    But since death didn't enter the world before Adam sinned that means evolution is fake and gαy. Big bang theory coincidences with evolution.
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2
    « previous next »