<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An\neffort to keep a bored mind active today i set to work reading and as i read i\nfound my mind wondering to the point of asking about the origins of the\nuniverse and the issue behind creation or “emergence” of the universe\nand how this came to be. An effort to keep a bored mind active today i set to work reading and as i read i found my mind wondering to the point of asking about the origins of the universe and the issue behind creation or “emergence” of the universe and how this came to be. One predominant school of thought […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"none","_mi_skip_tracking":false},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
\n
\nOne predominant school of thought believe the universe was created and that\nsomething\/someone much bigger than our universe “caused” it to come\ninto existence.
\n
\nAnother left wing school of thought believe that our universe began at a point\nzero known as the Big Bang which caused what was at that time to expand and the\nripple effect chain reaction was what brought about our universe. They\nattribute this to simple Energy.<\/strong>
\n
\nHowever\nhere is my conundrum and it is from the Law of conservation of mass or\notherwise called The principle of mass conservation.
\n
\nThe law of conservation of mass or principle of mass conservation states\nthat for any system closed to all transfers of matter and energy, the mass of\nthe system must remain constant over time, as system’s mass cannot change, so\nquantity can neither be added nor be removed. Hence, the quantity of mass is\nconserved over time.
\n
\nThe law implies that mass can neither be created nor destroyed, although it may\nbe rearranged in space, or the entities associated with it may be changed in\nform.
\n
\nSo if matter cannot be created nor destroyed why do so many scientists believe\nin the Big Bang theory?<\/strong>
\n
\nThe Big\nBang theory is the prevailing cosmological description of the development of\nthe Universe. Under this theory, space and time emerged together billions of\nyears ago after a huge burst of energy BUT the law of conservation of mass is\ndirectly against this theory!!
\n
\nRather\nthis Law points at something the creation advocates have been saying all along\nand that is that SOMETHING or SOMEONE “caused” our universe to begin\nto exist. How you say? Please follow the explanation of this law and it states\nthat …
\n
\n“The mass of the system\nmust remain constant over time, as system’s mass cannot change, so quantity can\nneither be added nor be removed. Hence, the quantity of mass is conserved over\ntime<\/strong>.\nThe law implies that mass can neither be created nor destroyed, <\/strong>although it may be\nrearranged in space, or the entities associated with it may be changed in form<\/strong>“
\n
\nWell\nChristians lay claim that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh so Jesus IS GOD.
\n
\nQuoting\nfrom Hebrews 13:8 it states that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever<\/strong>” So if Jesus is\nGod then replace Jesus Christ in that verse with GOD and it would read, “GOD is the same yesterday,\ntoday, and forever<\/strong>“
\n
\nThat\nstatement about God being the same and unchanging is a perfect match to the law\nof Conservation of mass which states that The mass of the system must remain constant\nover time, as system’s mass cannot change, so quantity can neither be added nor\nbe removed. Hence, the quantity of mass is conserved over time<\/strong>
\n
\nDoes this\nnot imply that the original Mass behind the “emergence” of our\nuniverse though caused a change but is in itself unchanging?
\n
\nIf\nScientists claim Energy was behind this then how did this energy begin to exist\nsince same law says energy cannot be created or destroyed? The problem here is\nthe word ENERGY and the moment you replace the word ENERGY with GOD it begins\nto make more sense.
\n
\nEnergy\ncould not have just appeared it needed to have been in existence already but\nthis would take us to an infinite timeline since energy cannot be created or\ndestroyed. Christians says God has always been. He was not created and cannot\nbe destroyed… Is this not the same as Energy?
\n
\nThey say\nhe created everything else but was himself not created. This means This God\n“Energy” at a point disrupted the trend Energy follows and caused a\n“change” in Energy and thus an emergence of matter but thereafter the\nlaw of conservation of mass kicked in as everything reverted to status quo as\nsuch cannot be repeated.
\n
\nJust\nthinking out loud from my head to my fingers as i type this.
\n
\nI would\nneed some scientific Atheists or some science guru in general to break this\ndown in an attempt at disengaging the above from God and clearly bringing a\nline of demarcation between ENERGY and GOD. IS ENERGY just ENERGY or Did Energy\ngain its EMERGENCE FROM GOD WHO IS THE FIRST LIVING ENERGY?
\n
\nYour\nthoughts people.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"