The Instigator
rumywonder
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ViceRegent
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The universe was created in 7 days and this can be explained by the big bang theory

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/15/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 648 times Debate No: 89727
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

rumywonder

Pro

Evolutionists claim that the universe is billions of years old. The Bible claims it was created in 6 days. I have a theory that connects the two ideas together. If all matter began at a singularity, then that singularity must have had a gravity so great that it caused time to race by at a phenomenal speed (as it has now been proven that Einsteins theory that gravity affects time is correct - the more gravity, the faster time passes), thus making millions of years pass by in an inkling. The whole process of creation could have taken a few days as written in ancient text, because time is not constant. Both science and the Bible says this.
ViceRegent

Con

The Bible says the earth and the universe were created at the same time (Gen 1:1). No Big Bang cosmologist would agree. The two ideas are incompatible with the Big Bang being facially absurd..
Debate Round No. 1
rumywonder

Pro

It is said in the book of Iasiah that God stretched the heavens out like a curtain. The same book also gave birth to the idea that the world is round - a notion that took another 2600 years for scientists to agree to. The big bang theory along with evolutionary theory were both stolen from the Bible. The big bang claims that everything came from nothing. So does Gen. Evolution claims life came from the sea, then there were birds, then dinosaurs, then modern animals. This is what Gen. says. Scientists dismiss the Bible because they reckon the earth and universe is older than what the Bible says it is. But the Bible also says that a thousand years on earth is like one day in heaven. The Bible gives many clues that time is not what we know it to be. If gravity can affect time, and if all the matter in the universe was at or near a single point, what do you think would happen to time considering the immensity of gravity in the early universe?
ViceRegent

Con

Again, the Bible is not compatible with Big Bang cosmology for the reason given. Please deal with the actual response. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 2
rumywonder

Pro

You have not stated why they do not agree. I have given evidence why they should. Please explain your argument against the idea that time could have moved faster in a infinitesimally greater gravitational situation.
ViceRegent

Con

I did state where they do not agree. The Bible states that the universe and the earth were created at the same time. Big Bang cosmology say they were about 10B years apart.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Brendan21 1 year ago
Brendan21
#analmods
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
It's fine if you find my moderation problematic, but would you care to explain how your vote met the standards? You can appeal it if you wish, but that requires defending your vote.
Posted by Brendan21 1 year ago
Brendan21
Whiteflame, here to kill the voting process. #terriblemods
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Brendan21// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: When Con gave a cited response from the Bible, Pro proceeded to ignore the comment and still demand answers despite the stated contradiction. Arguably the best way to lose a debate.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn't explain conduct or S&G. (2) Sources are insufficiently explained. The fact that Con cited the Bible doesn't mean that he presented reliable sources. (3) Arguments are insufficiently explained. Merely pointing to a drop and poor argument choice from Pro does not meet the standards, as the voter is required to assess specific arguments made by both sides.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: DBPDX// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I saw no compatibility between the two theorys when the debate started, the whole concept seemed to be dreamed up by pro.....Con actually quoted the bible as his source, citing an actual scripture, while it became apparent that pro was making things up as he went and avoiding the response.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter fails to evaluate any specific arguments made by either side, instead generalizing the points made by Pro to "theorys" and never pointing to a single argument made by Con.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Sanders2k16// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: No argument will convince me otherwise!

[*Reason for removal*] Not an RFD. The voter clearly mistakes the role of his vote, which is not to profess his viewpoint, but to evaluate the debate he's presented with. If he cannot distance himself from his own views on this topic, the voter should not vote on this debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by Brendan21 1 year ago
Brendan21
@ rumywonder Just because you, a human, can't be in two places at once DOES NOT mean that God according to the biblical definition would be unable to create both the heavens and the earth at the same time. The same standards do not apply to you and the Abrahamic God.
Posted by rumywonder 1 year ago
rumywonder
How do you eat fish and chips? The whole lot in one mouthful? Either the chips or fish have to be eaten one before the other. I built a bookshelf and a table. . . 20 years apart
Posted by ViceRegent 1 year ago
ViceRegent
But that is not what the text says. A better analogy would be "When the game started, I had chips and salsa in my hand.
Posted by rumywonder 1 year ago
rumywonder
Today I went to work and the shops. I couldn't have gone to two places at once
No votes have been placed for this debate.