Question by Jeremy W: So Nasa learns thru Chandra Observatory that the early Universe was DARK and some UNKNOWN event made it LIGHT?
After browsing the news I read an article about how Black Holes were abundant in the early Universe. It was an article on CNN which I will link to in the sources. The second page had a quote from a scientist who says and I quote; (page 2 of the article linked below)
“These observations of early black holes also shed light on how
the universe became transparent.
The very early universe was full of atomic hydrogen, a period called
the “dark ages” because it was completely opaque, Schawinski said.
Some mysterious event “re-ionized,” or turned the hydrogen into
charged particles called ions, such that light could travel freely.
The Nature study suggests that a typical black hole could not have
“lit up” the universe in this way. That’s because ultraviolet light
would have been trapped behind gas and dust; only the highest-energy
X-rays could escape, and they do not have this ionizing property.”
Now what is the importance of this? Well I could have saved them a few trillion dollars and a few decades of research. All they had to do is pick up a Bible and read the first 3 verses of Genesis other wise known as the story of Creation.
Darkness was on the face of the Deep. Let there be light and there was Light. Jesus was the Light of the World. He made the blind see. When your blind what are you not seeing? Ask Nasa because they are obviously blind the creation story is founded on truth. Man has been on Earth a fraction of its history yet men thousands of years ago so happened to know what science is just now learning. How did they know this without a Earth Orbiting Xray observatory? Same way they knew the Earth was covered with water, the mountains rose, and man is made of the very Earth itself.
So atheists what is your take on this? Im sure you can point out biblical flaws and errors but keep in mind it was recorded and translated by imperfect man. Nothing is perfect besides God himself thats why Heaven was at war. Even with the perfect creation man sinned. Man had a paradise on Earth but his desire to be like God took it all away. Thats why he made us unaware of right and wrong, because we will spend our lives destroying one another as they did in heaven for what we believe. It was only when man showed shame and hid that he was spared. Its like when you punish a child and they hide and you search for them calling their name. You are worried and are seperated from them and realize they have became aware of their wrong and are afraid. We may have gained knowledge of God from the tree but humility let him know we realized our place.
This may seem pointless to others but I felt inspired to write this. Blindness can be healed when you open your eyes to the light.
Concerning the Flood: The flood story in the bible is similar to the Ballad of Gilgamesh which was a poem from Babylonian times. Cultures worldwide have similar accounts of a Flood in their mythology and religions. One account of an event in history can be wrong but multiple ones need some consideration of being true. A story has a purpose – to tell others something in a way they can understand and gather meaning from it. A story is written to reach an ending. You can mistranslate a few words of a story but the end point usually is maintained. Mankinds downfall is the point, the Earth was in the beginning covered with water but only the light of creation revealed this. Thats the fate of the wicked, being seperated from that light through the darkness.
Best answer:
Answer by SpartanCanuck
“Picking up the Bible” ≠actually looking at the universe. If one just picks up the Bible, one learns there was a global flood which never actually happened. Even the aspects that you CAN find parallels to in modern science will not yield detailed, accurate descriptions of the mechanics involved. Good on you, though, if this particular bit of data fits your confirmation biases.
But yes, studying the actual universe is indeed inspiring and can open one’s eyes.
Edit: By the way, if you pick up NASA’s budget, you will see that they never had trillions of dollars.
Edit2: No. Multiple stories backed by geomorphological evidence needs some consideration of being true. Without that evidence, it needs consideration of being profound exaggeration of a far lesser event, mutated with retellings. This is particularly true when the story involves a man taking two of every terrestrial species in the world onto a boat a few thousand years ago (contraindicated by the distributions of species and genetic diversities within species). At that point, whatever grain of truth is buried in there is utterly useless to us folks who are trying to study the actual world. You can talk about wickedness and blindness, but the fact remains that your stories are at best CRUDELY related to the phenomena that we’re trying to study.
What do you think? Answer below!