deebeedee

Boing Boing asks, What came before the Big Bang? The article it cites says that the Big Bang theory is widely accepted by physicists as making “a lot of sense. Except for one small thing. That initial (infinitesimally small) point (of origin of the universe), called a singularity by physicists, is a physical impossibility. According to the models we have today, the temperature of the universe at that first moment would have had to be infinite, which mathematically makes no sense. Also, the singularity doesn’t do a good job of explaining where all the matter and energy we see today in the universe came from. So, physicists are increasingly starting to look at other branches of physics, to see what they can do to replace the singularity with a more reasonable proposition.”

What if they look into cosmogony, the study of the origin of the universe, where science and theology meet? What about God as the uncaused first cause? If we are going for the simplest explanation here (Occam’s Razor anyone?), Creatio ex Nihilo would be where I’d bet the farm on, instead of going for string theory concepts that look like physicists’ very own “God of the gaps.”

• Salon.com Books | We are meant to be here People are not the result of a cosmic accident, but of laws of the universe that grant our lives meaning and purpose, says physicist Paul Davies.

• iPhone: God machine or tech temptation

Ooh boy, I caught a glimpse of it and I can’t wait to see more. No, I’m not talking about the presidential debates, I’m talking about these debates.

Faith Under Fire is a talk/debate show premiering tonight at 10 p.m. on PAX TV. It is “a forum for all points of view — a provocative program that takes an unflinching look at the most controversial issues involving religion, spirituality and morality.” Be sure to watch the preview trailer (T1, 56k). Hope the show’s popular enough to move to a bigger network someday.

Excellent post about a believer’s attitude towards politics found here (via Creative Slips). Hugo says this in relation to a First Things article :

There will be times when this leads us into coalition with liberals. But there will be times when we are far, far apart. The Christian left must be faithful to Christ first, not secular dogma. Where our agendas and our understandings coincide, so much the better. But at times, we will stand with our Christian brethren on the right of the political spectrum, not out of sectarian loyalty but out of a sense that, as Carter said, “discerning God’s will and doing it is prior to everything else.”

I like how our political actions are not compelled by partisanship but by our duty to Christ.

It’s funny how Rhesa says, “Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell do not speak for me.” I’ve always felt the same way. I am reading political commentator Hugh Hewitt’s In But Not Of, a guide of sorts to young Christians seeking to make a mark in this world. In one chapter entitled “Either a Player or a Pastor Be - But You Can’t Be Both,” Jerry Falwell is used as an example of how mixing politics and religion has had ineffective results. I share Hewitt’s sentiment when he says, “I and most other evangelicals I know cringe when we see (Falwell) appear on any of the many television shows that gladly book him as a spokesman for the evangelical community.” It is because the American public has long turned off its ear to preachers “speaking on any issue of politics or public policy outside his own congregation.”

Hewitt advises those who are ordained to “leave the world to others, and tend to your flock.” In fairness, in subsequent chapters he sings the praises of Christians who dedicate their lives to winning souls for the kingdom. But according to him, the world should be left to believers who have positioned themselves to make a mark in the political arena by assembling the proper credentials, getting relevant jobs, and cultivating the right relationships.